M.Ravindhar, Vs The Chairman/Returning Officer

respondents in connection with the impugned Announcement in Proceeding Nil dated 24.03.2026 and Election Notification dated 06.04.2026 issued by the respondents

¶23

and quash the same and further direct the respondents to consider the 30 percent of woman reservation in the Madras high court advocate association election 2026 in light of the Judgment in Logamayas case and grant such other further relief as this Honble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶24

For Petitioners :

¶25

Mr.R.Dhinesh Kumar

¶26

ORDER

¶27

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.)

¶28

The present writ petition has been instituted challenging the election notification dated 06.04.2026 issued by the Election Committee of the Madras High Court Advocates Association.

¶29

The petitioner states that he is a member of the Association and the process of election has not been conducted in accordance with the established procedures and as per the bye-laws. Large number of eligible members are not included in the eligible voters list and their right to vote are infringed. Thus, the present writ petition has to be considered.

¶30

__________ Page 2 of 6

¶31

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

WP No. 14556 of 2026

¶33

When this Court raised the question of maintainability of a writ petition challenging the election notification issued by the Madras High Court Advocates Association which is not an instrumentality of a ‘State’ under Article 12 of the Constitution of India, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, on earlier occasions some writ petitions have been entertained by this Court.

¶34

The said answer is neither candid nor convincing. Entertaining a writ petition on an earlier occasion would not confer any right to maintain the present writ petition. Since the Madras High Court Advocates Association is a Society registered under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act and the bye-laws are approved by the Registrar under the provisions of the Act, elections are to be conducted in accordance with the approved bye-laws of the Association. In the event of any dispute, then the remedy is contemplated under Section 36 of the Societies Registration Act. In respect of election, the remedy would lie before the competent Civil Court.

¶35

That apart, once the process of election is set in motion, High Court may not entertain a petition to stall the process of election already commenced. In the present case, the process of election has already commenced on 06.04.2026 and is in progress. That apart, as it is made clear that the Madras High Court Advocates Association is not a ‘State’ within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India, no writ challenging the election is maintainable.

¶36

Page 3 of 6

¶37

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶38

WP No. 14556 of 2026

¶39

For the reasons stated above, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the competent civil Court in the manner contemplated under law. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶40

(S.M.S.,J.) (K.S.,J.) 16-04-2026

¶41

Index: Yes Speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes

¶42

KST

¶43

__________ Page 4 of 6

¶44

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶45

WP No. 14556 of 2026