disputes and had already been subject matter of adjudication on two previous occasions and on which two different views were taken. It is not so here. The dispute raised by the petitioners is personal to themselves, as to their membership and adjudication whereof entails adjudication of, whether the membership claimed by the petitioners of DSA was granted in accordance with the constitution of DSA. It cannot be said that the said disputes are of a fundamental character or likely to arise again and again or even if arises again and again, any legal question is required to be adjudicated. In each case, it will have to be decided, whether the person claiming membership was validly admitted as a member or not. Similarly, reliance on Bar Council of Delhi supra is misconceived. The challenge therein was to the Proviso to Rule 3(j) of the Bar Council of Delhi Election Rules, 1968. The vires of the Rule could certainly be gone into in a writ petition and owing to the electoral roll having been prepared on the basis of such Rule, which was held to be ultra vires and invalid, the challenge to the election was also entertained. The counsel for the petitioners certainly
