The Himachal Pradesh High Court recently disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed seeking implementation of the “one advocate one vote” concept in Bar Associations.
The petitioner sought directions to the Bar Council of Himachal Pradesh to effectively implement the Bar Council of India Resolution, which aimed to ensure that advocates can vote only once in one Bar Association, regardless of their multiple memberships.
The Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Satyen Vaidya observed that the issue was squarely covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Supreme Court Bar Association vs. B.D. Kaushik.
The Supreme Court had issued directions to strengthen Bar Associations and the legal profession, which included the implementation of the “one bar one vote” principle.
Despite the respondent’s counsel admitting that the issue was covered by the Supreme Court’s judgment, they urged the court to keep the petition pending, citing an appeal pending before the Supreme Court.
However, the court declined to keep the petition pending, as the directions sought had already been issued by the Supreme Court.
The court disposed of the petition, directing the Bar Council of Himachal Pradesh to issue necessary instructions to all Bar Associations in the state to strictly adhere to the “one bar one vote” principle.
The court also clarified that in case the Supreme Court’s judgments are varied or modified, the Bar Council would have the right to issue further instructions in accordance with the law.
The post appeared first on .
The petitioner sought directions to the Bar Council of Himachal Pradesh to effectively implement the Bar Council of India Resolution, which aimed to ensure that advocates can vote only once in one Bar Association, regardless of their multiple memberships.
The Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Satyen Vaidya observed that the issue was squarely covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Supreme Court Bar Association vs. B.D. Kaushik.
The Supreme Court had issued directions to strengthen Bar Associations and the legal profession, which included the implementation of the “one bar one vote” principle.
Despite the respondent’s counsel admitting that the issue was covered by the Supreme Court’s judgment, they urged the court to keep the petition pending, citing an appeal pending before the Supreme Court.
However, the court declined to keep the petition pending, as the directions sought had already been issued by the Supreme Court.
The court disposed of the petition, directing the Bar Council of Himachal Pradesh to issue necessary instructions to all Bar Associations in the state to strictly adhere to the “one bar one vote” principle.
The court also clarified that in case the Supreme Court’s judgments are varied or modified, the Bar Council would have the right to issue further instructions in accordance with the law.
The post appeared first on .