Dismissed¶15

Vineet Lakhani v. State of Up and 5 Others

Allahabad HC13 May 2025SPLA/422/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

SPECIAL APPEAL No. 422 of 2025, Vineet Lakhani v. State of UP and 5 others, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Chief Justice's Court), decided 13.05.2025. Keywords: territorial jurisdiction; cause of action; writ petition dismissed; Bar Council of India notices dated 22.09.2021, 13.09.2024, 02.01.2025; cancellation of enrollment by final order dated 17.02.2025; University order declaring degree invalid; jurisdiction determined by relief claimed in petition; liberty to approach appropriate forum.

What did the court decide?

Jurisdiction has to be determined based on the relief as claimed in the petition and not on the ground what may be available to the appellant to be challenged. ¶14

Vineet Lakhani vs State of Up and 5 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:77661-DB

¶2

Chief Justice's Court

¶3

Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 422 of 2025

¶4

Appellant :- Vineet Lakhani Respondent :- State of UP and 5 others Counsel for Appellant :- Raghav Arora Counsel for Respondent :- Meenakshi Singh (A.C.S.C.), Rohit Pandey, Sai Girdhar

¶5

Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.

¶6

This appeal is directed against the order dated 03.04.2025 passed in Writ-C No. 8985 of 2025.

¶7

The petition was filed by the appellant seeking to question the validity of notices dated 22.09.2021, 13.09.2024 and 02.01.2025 issued by the Bar Council of India. Further relief was claimed qua the University which was impleaded as party respondent.

¶8

A preliminary objection was raised pertaining to the territorial jurisdiction inter alia on the ground that the office of the Bar Council of India is at New Delhi and, therefore, this Court would not have the territorial jurisdiction.

¶9

Plea was raised on behalf of the appellant that the order passed by the University declaring the degree as invalid, would provide territorial jurisdiction to the Court. The fact that the communication of the University was not under challenge, the Court was of the opinion that the cause of action had not arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court and, consequently, dismissed the petition with liberty to the appellant to approach the appropriate forum.

¶10

Learned counsel for the appellant made submissions that as the

¶11

appellant intended to challenge the order passed by the University declaring the degree as invalid, the dismissal of the writ petition on the ground of territorial jurisdiction was not justified.

¶12

Learned counsel for the respondents points out that the petition as filed was already infructuous, inasmuch as by order dated 17.02.2025, the Bar Council of India has already passed final order and has cancelled the enrollment of the appellant pursuant to the notices which were under challenge.

¶13

Submissions sought to be made seeking to question the validity of the order passed by the learned Single Judge, cannot be countenanced. The challenge sought to be laid on the purported ground that the appellant would challenge the order passed by the University declaring the degree of the appellant as invalid and, therefore, the order passed by the learned Single Judge was not valid, can't confer jurisdiction.

¶14

The jurisdiction has to be determined based on the relief as claimed in the petition and not on the ground what may be available to the appellant to be challenged.

¶15

Consequently, no interference is required in the order impugned. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed .

¶16

Order Date :- 13.5.2025 RK/AKShukla

¶17

(Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ)

¶18

Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vineet Lakhani v. State of Up and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vineet Lakhani v. State of Up and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raj Vikram Singh vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Mak Fitness LLP vs State of Uttar Pradesh and Another

Kasim Ali vs Deputy Commissioner, State Tax SECTOR-13, Ghaziabad

Masi Ullah vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Vijay Pratap Singh vs U.P. Electricity Regulatory Commission, Lucknow and 3 Others

M/S Agarwal Khilona Bazar vs State of Uttar Pradesh and Another