Disposed

Anoopsingh S/O Mohansingh Parihar v. Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa, Mumbai Thr. Secretary and Others

Bombay HC19 Jan 2018WP/349/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner complained of lack of mechanism for election grievances in State Bar Council elections. Court directed him to file representation with respondents instead of issuing writ immediately.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted leave to make appropriate representation to respondents within one week. Writ petition disposed.

Anoopsingh S/O Mohansingh Parihar Vs Bar Council of… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

IN THE COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.349/2018

¶4

(Annopsingh s/o Mohansingh Parihar vs. Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa and others)

¶5

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders

¶6

CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 19^th January, 2018.

¶7

1 . Heard Shri Anoopsingh Mohansingh Parihar (Advocate) in-person. His grievance is, though various wrong practices committed during elections to State Bar Council are enumerated, no forum for lodging complaint immediately, is provided. He submits that there has to be some mechanism for this purpose and, for the present, even if an Observer is appointed to monitor such elections, the grievance, to some extent, will be redressed.

¶8

2 . He fairly points out that as rules are still not amended and some arrangement in this respect is being considered by the State Bar Council along with Bar Council of India, till then unless this Court intervenes, the mechanism will not be in place.

¶9

3 . Thus, request to this Court is to issue writ to the Bar Council of Maharashtra to appoint Observor for elections which, according to learned petitioner, are due in March, 2018.

¶10

¶11

4 . The petitioner has not made any such demand/ representation to Bar Council of Maharashtra. This Court can issue mandamus when there is a failure of public authority to discharge its duties or any other obligations.

¶12

5 . We, therefore, grant petitioner leave to make appropriate representation to respondent nos.1 and 2 within one week from today.

¶13

6 . With this liberty, presently, we dispose of Writ Petition. No costs.

¶14

7 . Steno copy allowed.

¶15

JUDGEJUDGE

¶16

sahare

Anoopsingh S/O Mohansingh Parihar v. Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa, Mumbai Thr. Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anoopsingh S/O Mohansingh Parihar v. Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa, Mumbai Thr. Secretary and Others

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

Jayshree Ramesh Kulte Vs R.V. Ganjiwale, President, Hutatma Smarak Samiti, Ashti and Anr.

Ku. Jayshree Ramesh Kulte Vs Shri Vinayak S. Pare and Another

Shri. Baban Jairam Randive, Chandrapur Vs State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary, Mumbai and Others

Shri. Pradeep Ramrao Dorlikar and Others Vs Shri Devendra Gangadhar Rao Fadnavis, Honable Chief Minister and Minister,Urban Devpt.Deptt.and 1

Yeegram S/O Sahebrao Karale and Others Vs Smt. Nayana Arjun Gunde Chief Executive Officer Z. P. Wardha and Another

Komalprasad S/O Narayan Katare and Another Vs State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mumbai and 4 Others