Disposed

Bombay Lawyers Association v. Union of India and 3 Ors.

Bombay HC5 Jul 2016PIL/52/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a PIL seeking directions for 30% reservation for women advocates under the Advocate Act, 1961, the Court held it could not direct the Legislature to amend the law or issue a writ against Bar Associations. The petition was disposed of upon the Bar Council of India assuring a decision.

What did the court decide?

Prayer granted against Union of India only by accepting the Bar Council's statement; prayers against Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa and Bar Associations dismissed.

Bombay Lawyers Association Vs Union of India… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

15-PIL-52-15.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 52 OF 2015

¶4

Bombay Lawyers' Association …Petitioner Versus Union of India & Ors. …Respondents

¶5

Mr. Satyaprakash Sharma, a/w Mr. Ashok Asthane, i/b Abdi & Co., for the Petitioner.

¶6

Mrs. Neeta Masurkar, for Respondent No. 1.

¶7

Mr. Amitkumar D. Sale, for Respondent No. 2.

¶8

Mr. M.D. Naik, AGP for Respondent No. 3.

¶9

Mr. Sudam Kale, for Respondent No. 4.

¶10

CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATE : 5th July 2016

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

1. Learned Counsel appearing for the Bar Council of India

¶13

on instructions of Mr. Pandey, Joint Secretary states that in terms of letter dated 4th February 2016 addressed to the Bar Council by the Ministry of Law and Justice, appropriate decision will be taken by the

¶14

Bar Council within a period of six weeks from today.

1 / 2

Sharayu .

15-PIL-52-15.doc

We accept the said statement. Prayer (a) of this Public

¶19

Interest Litigation reads thus:-

¶20

“This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue appropriate writ

¶21

or direction or order to the Respondent No. 1 to consider 30% reservation of women advocates in Respondent No. 2 and 4 and Bar Associations.”

¶22

3. As far as the prayers sought against the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa as well as Bar Associations are concerned, we are unable to issue any direction. For grant of relief against the Union of India, amendment of the Advocate Act, 1961 will be necessary. In a Public Interest Litigation, Writ Court cannot issue a direction to the Legislature to amend the laws in a particular manner. As far as direction to the Bar Associations is concerned, no writ can be issued against the Bar Associations. By accepting the statement made by the learned Counsel appearing for the Bar Council of India, we dispose of this Petition. The decision taken by the Bar Council of India be communicated to the Petitioner.

¶23

2 / 2

¶24

Sharayu .

Bombay Lawyers Association v. Union of India and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bombay Lawyers Association v. Union of India and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pradipkumar S/O Popatlal Vakharia Vs State of Maha. through Urban Development Dept. through Secretary Mumbai and 4 Others

Noor Mohammed Khatri Vs Slum Rehabilitation Authority and 11 Ors.

Shri. Balaram Shid and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Pandurang Khandu Bhangare and Ors. Vs Sujata Farma Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Vasant Ganesh Dabke Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Public Works Dept and Ors.

Shri. Prakash Shrawanji Itankar and Another Vs State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Department of Medical Education and Medicine and Others

Mr. Gajanan S/O. Sanjay Charde Vs State of Maha., through Its Secretary, Dept. of Public Work, and Others

Ashokappa S/O. Narayanappa Iregaonkar Vs the State of Maha., Dept. of Rural Water Supply, through Its Principal Secretary, Mumbai and Others

Noor Mohammed Khatri Vs Slum Rehabilitation Authority and 11 Ors.

Vanashakti Public Trust and 5 Ors. Vs Union of India and 9 Ors. and J.S.R.M. Media (Applicant)

Krunal Ravindra Rahate and Anr. Vs Pankaj Ranjit Singh Kapadia

A.P. Properties (Builders) Vs Diljit Singh Chandhok and 3 Ors.

Bakshish Singh Chandhok and 2 Ors. Vs Diljit Singh Chandhok and Anr.

Union of India (Applicant Intervener) and Ori. Petitioner Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.