Appeal filed by mohnakrishnan in sc against salem bar case order IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No. OF 2021 (Under Article 136 of the Constitution of India) (Against the Common final Impugned Judgment and Order dated 20/01/21 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in Writ Petition No 1571/2019) (WITH PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF) IN THE MATTER OF: G.MOHANAKRISHANAN Petitioner Versus V.MADHESH and others Respondents PAPER BOOK (FOR INDEX PLEASE SEE INSIDE) WITH I.A. No. of 2021: Application seeking exemption from filing certified copy of the Impugned Order WITH I.A. No. of 2021: Application permission to file SLP WITH I.A. No. of 2021: Application seeking exemption from filing official translation

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No. OF 2021
(Under Article 136 of the Constitution of India)

(Against the Common final Impugned Judgment and Order dated 20/01/21 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in Writ Petition No 1571/2019)

(WITH PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF)
IN THE MATTER OF:
G.MOHANAKRISHANAN Petitioner

Versus

V.MADHESH and others Respondents
PAPER BOOK
(FOR INDEX PLEASE SEE INSIDE)
WITH
I.A. No. of 2021: Application seeking exemption from filing certified copy of the Impugned Order
WITH
I.A. No. of 2021: Application permission to file SLP
WITH
I.A. No. of 2021: Application seeking exemption from filing official translation

ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER: MR. S.GOWTHAMAN
INDEX
S.
No. Particulars of Document Page no. of part to which it belongs Remarks
Part I
(Contents of Paper Book) Part II
(Contents of File alone)
(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v)
1. Court Fees
2. O/R on Limitation A A
3. Listing Proforma A1-A2 A1-A2
4. Cover Page of Paper Book A3
5. Index of Record of Proceedings A4
6. Limitation Report prepared by the Registry A5
7. Defect List A6
8. Note Sheet NS1to
9. Synopsis & List of Dates B –
10. Impugned Order: Impugned Judgment and Order dated 20/01/21 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in Writ Petition No 1571/2019 1 –
11. Special Leave Petition with Affidavit
12. Appendix
Article 226 of the constitution of India
13. I.A. No. of 2020: Application seeking exemption from filing certified copy of the Impugned Order
14. I.A. No. of 2020: Application permission to file SLP
15. I.A. No. of 2020: Application seeking exemption from filing hard copy of the affidavit and vakalatnaofficial translation
16. MEMO OF PARTIES
17. F/M
18. V/A

SYNOPSIS
The present special leave petition against the Common final Impugned Judgment and Order dated 20/01/21 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in Writ Petition No 1571/2019, wherein Hon’ble Division Bench erroneously interfered the order passed by the Bar Council of Tamilnadu and Puducherry without any power and made unwarranted observations about the elected member of the Bar Associations.
Hon’ble High Court order is against material and only on the presumptions. Hon’ble High Court barred the elected members to contest the election again, which is against the bylaws of the association. High Court cannot have the power to make by laws for any society without approved by the general body. Any decision related to the particular society / Bar Association can be taken through conducting general body meeting and on the approval of the members of the association. High Court does not have the power to interfere and dictate the terms related to functioning and election of the Bar Associations. If any infirmity and illegality or arbitrariness found in the process of election, court can interfere but not before that.
Petitioner is the member of Bar Council of Tamilnadu and Puducherry and He is the Co- Chairman. He is the president of the Madras High Court Advocates Associtation. By Impugned order without hearing the petitioner made unwanted observations against the Associations and election /selection of officer bearers. Petitioner aggrieved by those observations and amendment/ alteration of by laws of particular association without placing the same to General Body to resolve.
Hence, the present petition.
LIST OF DATES
20/11/2018 A decision was taken in the General Body Meeting held on 14.11.2018 to conduct election for Salem Bar Association. Mr.S.D. Manivasagam, a senior member of the Bar, was requested to act as Election Officer, as he also acted as an Election Officer in the three previous elections.
Dated Nil 2018
The Election Officer issued the election notification for the election of office bearers of Salem Bar Association for the period 2019~2021 to be held on 11.01.2019. The office bearers include the posts of President, Vice President, Secretary, Treasurer, Librarian, Assistant Secretary, Seven Senior Executive Committee Members and Three Junior Executive Committee Members. The petitioner filed his nomination for the post of Senior Executive Committee Member. The list of candidates also got published.

03/01/2019
07/01/2019
11/01/2019 This Writ Petition has been filed by a member of the Salem Bar Association challenging the order passed by the 3rd nd respondent/Special Committee dated 03.01.2019 and the consequential orders dated 07.01.2019 and 11.01.2019. 3rd respondent passed orders on 03.01.2019, 07.01.2019 and 11.01.2019 appointing a Committee consisting of Mr.R. Srinivasan, Mr.K. Rajasekaran and Mr.R. Balakumar to conduct the election to Salem Bar Association. based on the complaint given by the 5th respondent, who complained that bulk subscription on behalf of the defaulting members have been made and the members from outstation have been included as voters and one bar one vote Rule has not been followed. After hearing the parties, the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry appointed the Special Committee for conducting election to the Salem Bar Association and the same cannot be questioned.
30.04.2019 Mr. Rajakumar, Secretary of the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry, who was directed to attend the General Body meeting to be held on 30.04.2019, though attended the meeting in which 315 members out of 1500 members were present, no voting could be held in view of different and conflicting views expressed. No voting could be conducted on the proposed amendment to the existing bye~laws by which a prohibition is sought to be imposed on the members, who contest more than one time continuously.
2019 Writ petition filed by the respondent No 1 to challenge the intervention of Bar Council of Tamilnadu and Puducherry and appointment of election committee and challenged the order dated 3/1,7/1 and 11/1/2019 orders.
20/01/21 High Court by its impugned order interfered without any materials and evidence mentioned unnecessary allegations which is unwarranted. Interfered the order passed by the Bar Council of Tamilnadu and Puducherry, which High Court does not have the power.
10/2/21 Hence the present SLP.

 

 

 

 

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
[S.C.R., Order XXI Rule 3(1)(a)]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _________ OF 2021
(Under Article 136 of the Constitution of India)
(WITH PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF)
IN THE MATTER OF:

WA MD No 1096 &1098 of 2020
HIGH COURT THIS COURT

G.Mohanakrishnan
Advocate
176. New Additional Law chambers
Madras High Court
Chennai – 600 104 Not a party

Petitioner

 

VERSUS
1. V. Madhesh
Advocate
Salem Bar Association
Salem
Petitioner Contesting Respondent No. 1
2. Secretary,
Bar Council of Tamil
Nadu and Puducherry,
High Court Buildings,
Chennai – 104 Respondent No 1 Contesting Respondent No. 2
3. Special Committee,
Bar Council of Tamil Nadu,
rep. By its Members
Mr.R. Singaravelan,
Sr. Advocate,
Mr.N. Chandrasekharan,
O/o. The Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry,High Court Buildings, Chennai – 104.
2ndRespondent Contesting Respondent No. 3
4. Mr.G. Ponnusamy,
Advocate, President,
Bar Association,
Salem
3rdRespondent Contesting Respondent No. 4
5. Mr.K.R.R. Aiyappamani,
Advocate, Secretary,
Bar Association,
Salem

4thRespondent Contesting Respondent No. 5
6. Mr.M. Ahamed Shajahan,
Advocate,
33/11, Chozan West
Street,Salem – 636 001 5thRespondent Contesting Respondent No. 6
7. Mr.S.D. Manivasagam,
Advocate,
Bar Association, Salem
8. Mr.R. Srinivasan,
Advocate,
Bar Association, Salem
9. Mr.K. Rajasekaran,
Advocate,
Bar Association, Salem

10. Mr. Balakumar,
Advocate,
Bar Association, Salem

6thRespondent

 

 

7th Respondent

 

 

8th Respondent

 

 

9th Respondent

 

 

Contesting Respondent No. 7

 

Contesting Respondent No. 8

 

 

Contesting Respondent No. 9

 

Contesting Respondent No. 10
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION
To

The Hon’ble Chief Justice of India and His
Companion Judges of the Supreme Court of India
The humble petition of the Petitioners above named

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. This is a Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution of India seeking special leave to appeal against the Common final Impugned Judgment and Order dated 20/01/21 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in Writ Petition No 1571/2019, wherein Hon’ble High court directed to contest election and debarred the elected members to contest election again and made unwarranted remarks against the elected members of the Bar Associations and directed to file compliance report.
1A. No letter of patent appeal lie against the impugned order.

2. QUESTIONS OF LAW
The Petitioners submit that the following substantial questions of law arise for consideration of this Hon’ble Court:
(i) Whether the Hon’ble High Court is right, without any material on the basis of assumption make unwarranted observation against elected member of the Bar Associations?.
(ii) Whether High Court right to interfere the order passed by the Bar Council of Tamilnadu and Puducherry, which has the power under Advocates Act ?.
(iii) Whether High Court right in debarring the elected advocates to contest election again even though bye laws of the association is permitted?.
(iv) Has not the High Court erred in bringing new by law in particular society without approved the same in General Body Meeting?.
(v) Has not the Hon’ble High Court order is without jurisdiction?
3. DECLARATION UNDER RULE 3 (2)
The Petitioner state that no other petition seeking leave to appeal has been filed by her against the Common final Impugned Judgment and Order dated 20/01/21 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in Writ Petition No 1571/2019.
4. DECLARATION UNDER RULE 5
The annexure P-1 to P- produced along with the Special Leave Petition are true copies of the pleadings/documents, which formed part of the records of the court below against whose order the leave to appeal is sought for in this petition.
5. GROUNDS OF APPEAL
The Petitioners herein prefer the present Special Leave Petition on the following among other grounds, taken without prejudice to each other:
A. Because the impugned order is against the Bar Council has got power under Section 6(1)(dd) of the Advocates’ Act, 1961, Section 9A, 13, 14 and 14A of Tamil Nadu Advocates’ Welfare Act, 1987 and Rules 6, 9, 14, 15, 18, 21 and 22 of Bar Council of India Certificate and Place of Practice (Verification) Rules, 2015
B. Because Mr. Rajakumar, Secretary of the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry, who was directed to attend the General Body meeting to be held on 30.04.2019, though attended the meeting in which 315 members out of 1500 members were present, no voting could be held in view of different and conflicting views expressed. No voting could be conducted on the proposed amendment to the existing bye~laws by which a prohibition is sought to be imposed on the members, who contest more than one time continuously.
C. Because no resolution passed related to the prohibition regarding contesting in election more than once is concerned, as rightly pointed out, usually, the bye~laws of the association should have such a provision. The said prohibition should be brought by a resolution by General Body by two~thirds majority as per bye~law 35, which reads as follows:35. Rules shall not be amended except by resolutions of the General Body by two~thirds majority of the members present in the meeting specially convened for the purpose.”
D. Because formation of association is an internal matter and Courts may not have any power to meddle with the same
E. Because the Special Committee permitted the office bearers to contest the election for two consecutive terms and thereafter, they are prohibited from contesting the elections for the next three terms, to avoid monopoly of the elected office bearers.
F. Because High Court Court erroneously opined that permitting the elected office bearers for continous two terms is unreasonable and similarly prohibiting the elected members from contesting election from subsequent third to fifth terms is also unreasonable.
G. Because High Court erroneously modified the order dated 03.06.2019 is modified by permitting the elected office bearers of the advocates
H. Because Hon’ble High Court erroneously directs the Special Committee of the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry barring the elected members from contesting for further three terms is modified as one term. In other words, the elected office bearers of the Associations cannot contest continuously for the next election and they can contest in the alternate election. Which is against by law and against the wish of majority of members of the association.
6. GROUNDS FOR INTERIM RELIEF
It is most respectfully submitted that the Hon’ble High Court has erred in passing directions in the writ petitions, the observations unwarranted and should be expunged. The order passed by the High Court against the majority decision of the Bar Association. Hence, it is prayed that while this petition is pending adjudication, the operation of the impugned order be stayed It is respectfully urged that if the Interim Relief as prayed for, is not granted, it would cause the Petitioner irreparable harm, injury and prejudice. It is vehemently urged that the grant of the interim order would not cause any harm or prejudice to the Respondents and the balance of convenience lies in favour of the Petitioner. The petitioner is the co-chairman of Bar Counsil of Tamilnadu and Puducherry and President of Madras High Court Advocates Association. The remarks made by the High Court is unwarranted and bad taste. It is therefore in the interest of justice that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to grant an interim relief as has been prayed for by the Petitioner.
7. PRAYER
It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:
(i) grant special leave to appeal Against the Common final Impugned Judgment and Order dated 20/01/21 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in Writ Petition No 1571/2019; and
(ii) pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case and thereby render justice.
8. PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF
It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:
(i) grant ad interim ex parte stay of operation of the Impugned Judgment and Order dated 20/01/21 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in Writ Petition No 1571/2019;
(ii) pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case and thereby render justice.
Drawn and Filed by:

(Mr. S.GOWTHAMAN)
Drawn By
B.KARUNAKARAN Advocate for Petitioner
Drawn on: .02.2021
Filed on: .02.2021
New Delhi

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. of 2021
IN THE MATTER OF:
G.MOHANAKRISHANAN Petitioner

Versus

V.MADHESH and others Respondents
C E R T I F I C A T E
Certified that the Special Leave Petition is confined only to the pleadings before the Court whose order is challenged and the other documents relied upon in those proceedings. No additional facts, documents or grounds have been taken therein or relied upon in the Special Leave Petition. It is further certified that the copies of the documents/annexures attached to the Special Leave Petition are necessary to answer the questions of law raised in the petition or to make out grounds urged in the Special Leave Petition for consideration of this Hon’ble Court. This Certificate is given on the basis of the instructions given by the petitioners/person authorized by the petitioners whose affidavit is filed in support of the Special Leave Petition.
Date:06 02.2020 S.GOWTHAMAN)
Advocate for Petitioner
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
I.A. No. of 2021
IN
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No. of 2021
IN THE MATTER OF:
G.MOHANAKRISHANAN Petitioner

Versus

V.MADHESH and others Respondents
APPLICATION SEEKING EXEMPTION FROM FILING CERTIFIED COPY OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER
To

The Hon’ble Chief Justice of India and His
Companion Judges of the Supreme Court of India
The humble petition of the Petitioners above named

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. This is an application seeking exemption from filing certified copy of the impugned order in the accompanying Petition filed under Article 136 of the Constitution of India seeking special leave to against the Common final Impugned Judgment and Order dated 20/01/21 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in Writ Petition No 1571/2019.
2. It is submitted that petitioner is not the part to the impugned order was passed on 20/01/2020. The Petitioner have applied for a certified copy of the same. However it is yet to be made ready. Since the respondents might erect the high tension electric tower in the petitioner property the Petitioner isfiling the present petition along with an application seeking exemption from filing the certified copy. The Petitioner undertake to file the certified copy once the same is made ready and issued to the Petitioner, if this Hon’ble Court deems it fit and necessary.
3. It is therefore submitted that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to exempt the petitioners from filing a certified copy of the impugned order and judgment in the interest of justice.
PRAYER
It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:
(i) Exempt the petitioners from filing certified copy of the impugned order; and
(ii) pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case and thereby render justice.
Drawn and Filed by:

(S.GOWTHAMAN)
Advocate for Petitioner
Drawn on: .02.2020
Filed on: .02.2020
New Delhi

 

 

 

 

 

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
I.A. No. of 2021
IN
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No. of 2021
IN THE MATTER OF:
G.MOHANAKRISHANAN Petitioner

Versus

V.MADHESH and others Respondents
APPLICATION SEEKING PERMISSION TO FILE SLP
To

The Hon’ble Chief Justice of India and His
Companion Judges of the Supreme Court of India
The humble petition of the Petitioners above named

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. This is an application seeking permission to file SLP along with the accompanying petition filed under Article 136 of the Constitution of India seeking special leave to appeal against the Common final Impugned Judgment and Order dated 20/01/21 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in Writ Petition No 1571/2019.
2. It is respectfully submitted that the petitioner is elected member of the Bar Council of Tamilnadu and Puducherry and he is the Co-chairman of the Bar Council of TN and Puducherry. He is the president of Madras High Court advocates association. High Court without having any material on the strength of assumption made various allegations and observations related to the election of Bar Associations selection of officer bearers of Bar Associations The observations are unwarranted. Hence petitioner prejudice the observations and praying for expunge those observations made against the selection and election of the office bearers of the Bar Council.
3. It is submitted that petitioner is not party to the impugned order. High Court made unnecessary observations against the member of bar and elected member of the Bar Counsil of Tamilnadu and Puducherry . High Court without any material on the strength of assumptions modified the order and setaside the order passed by the Bar Counsil of Tamilandu and Puducherry
PRAYER

It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:
(i) Permit the petitioner to file SLP; and
(ii) pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case and thereby render justice.
Drawn and Filed by:

(S.GOWTHAMAN)
Advocate for Petitioner
Drawn on: 06 .02.2021
Filed on: 06..02.2021
New Delhi

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
I.A. No. of 2021
IN
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No. of 2021
IN THE MATTER OF:
G.MOHANAKRISHANAN Petitioner

Versus

V.MADHESH and others Respondents
APPLICATION SEEKING EXEMPTION FROM FILING HARD COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND VAKALATNAMA
To
The Hon’ble Chief Justice of India and His
Companion Judges of the Supreme Court of India
The humble petition of the Petitioners above named
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. This is an application seeking exemption from filing certified copy of the impugned order in the accompanying Petition filed under Article 136 of the Constitution of India seeking special leave to Against the Common final Impugned Judgment and Order dated 20/01/21 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in Writ Petition No 1571/2019.
4. It is submitted that petitioner is not the part to the impugned order was passed on 20/01/2021. Petitioner not party. Sending hard copy of the affidavit and vakalant nama will take three working days. Undertake to file hard copy of the same within week. It is therefore submitted that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to exempt the petitioners from filing a hard copy of the affidavit and vakalatnama in the interest of justice.
PRAYER
It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:
(iii) Exempt the petitioners from filing hard copy of the affidavit and vakalatnama; and
(iv) pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case and thereby render justice.
Drawn and Filed by:
(S.GOWTHAMAN) Advocate for Petitioner

 

 

 

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NOS. of 2021
IN THE MATTER OF:
G.MOHANAKRISHANAN Petitioner

Versus

V.MADHESH and others Respondents
AFFIDAVIT

I, S.GOWTHAMAN, advocate on record, 103. Old lawyers chambers, Supreme Court of India, New delhi- 110001, do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely state as follows:
1. That I am the counsel for the Petitioner herein and as such I am well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the present case and am competent to swear to this affidavit.
2.That I have perused a copy of the accompanying application filed along with the same and that the averments contained therein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Nothing material has been concealed therefrom. No part thereof is false.

DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified at Delhi on this the 6th day of February 2021 that the contents of the above affidavit are true and correct and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom and no part thereof is false.

• DEPONENT