Kaushalendra Tiwari v. the Bar Council of U.P. Maharshi Dayanand Marg Prayagraj Thru. Secy. and Another

Allahabad HC2 May 2025WRIC/4207/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Advocate with two years' practice challenged exclusion from the voter list for Central Bar Association, Raebareli elections, contending the eligibility period runs from membership date, not certificate of practice date. Court issued dasti notice to opposite party no. 2 and listed the matter fresh.

What the court decided

AI extract

Kaushalendra Tiwari vs the Bar Council of U.P. Maharshi… — Election Law | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Court No. - 2

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4207 of 2025

¶3

Petitioner :- Kaushalendra Tiwari Respondent :- The Bar Council Of U.P. Maharshi Dayanand Marg Prayagraj Thru. Secy. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Pashupati Nath Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- Subhash Chandra Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.

¶5

Heard.

¶6

The petitioner's grievance is that he has completed two years practice, but his name is not mentioned in the voter list which has been published on 30.04.2025 by the Elders Committee for election to the Executive Committee of the Central Bar Association, Raebareli.

¶7

The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 5.4.2025 passed by the Elders Committee, according to which only such members of the Bar, who have obtained the certificate of practice by 30.3.2025 from the U.P. Bar Council, would be eligible for voting in the elections. The voter list for the said elections has been published on 30.4.2025. The petitioner's case is that he got the certificate of posting from the Bar Council on 01.05.2023.

¶8

The contention of the petitioner is that the date of the membership of the association is the basis for calculating the requirement of two years which is also mentioned in bye law 54 of the model bye-laws of U.P. Bar Council, which has been adopted by the Central Bar Association, Raebareli. It is also contended that these two years period should not be calculated from the date of issuance of COP but from the date of membership and additionally, the condition is that the voter should have a COP issued by the U.P. Bar Council.

¶9

Let dasti notice be issued to the petitioner for service upon the opposite party no. 2.

¶10

List this case on 07.05.2025 as fresh.

¶11

Senior Registrar shall communicate this order to the District Judge, Raebareli who in turn shall communicate it to the Elders Committee so that they may appear on the next date.

¶12

Order Date :- 2.5.2025 Shravan

¶13

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Kaushalendra Tiwari v. the Bar Council of U.P. Maharshi Dayanand Marg Prayagraj Thru. Secy. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Kaushalendra Tiwari v. the Bar Council of U.P. Maharshi Dayanand Marg Prayagraj Thru. Secy. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Aditya Pal Thru His Father Jeevendra Kumar Pal and Another vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Social Justice New Delhi and 6 Others

M/S Khare Traders Thru. Proprietor Anurudha Kumar Khare, Jhansi vs State of U.P. Thru. Special Secy. Deptt. of Geology and Mining Lko./Rivisional Auth. and Another

M/S Adycon Conrete LLP Thru. Partner Shri Pawan Kumar Agarwal vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Public Works Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

M/S Maqson Developers Private Ltd.Thru.Its Director Mr.Tabish Maqsood Khan and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Geology and Mining Govt. U.P. and 8 Others

Mani Mandir Seva Nyas Samiti Thru. Laxmi Kant Mishra, Senior Manager and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Govt. of U.P. Lko. U.P. and 5 Others

Rahul Vishwakarma vs Executive Engineer Jal Kal Vibhag Zone 8 Nagar Nigam Lko. and Another