SATISH KUMAR SHARMA Vs. BAR COUNCIL OF H.P.
LAWS(HPH)-1997-3-20
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
Decided on March 18,1997

SATISH KUMAR SHARMA Appellant
VERSUS
BAR COUNCIL OF H P Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

LINGAPPA POCHANNA APPEALWAR V. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. [REFERRED]
HANIRAJL CHULANI VS. BAR COUNCIL OF MAHARASHTRA AND GOA [REFERRED]



Cited Judgements :-

IQBAL AHMED VS. KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & OTHERS [LAWS(CAL)-2018-3-12] [REFERRED TO]
MANGALRASHI BARTER PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR VS. KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & OTHERS [LAWS(CAL)-2018-3-13] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)The Petitioner after passing LLB. in 1975-76 got appointed as Assistant (Legal) by the H.P. State Electricity Board (here-in-after referred to as "the Board"). The post was re-designated as 'Law-Officer Grade-II' in 1978. By office order dated 6-9-1983 the Board allowed him to act as an Advocate of the Board and also ordered that the expenditure on account of his getting a licence from the Bar Council shall be borne by the Board. His application for enrolment was forwarded by the Secretary of the Board to the Respondent on 13-10-1983. By a letter dated 28-3-1984 the Secretary of the Respondent informed the Secretary of the Board that the office order dated 6- 9-1983 of the Board did not meet the requirements of the Rules and that he should first be designated as a Law Officer. The addressee was also requested to send the order of appointment and the terms of such appointment. On 11-6-1984 the Board passed an office order modifying the earlier order dated 6-9-1983 and declared the Petitioner as Law Officer of the Board. Thereafter on 5-7-1984 Anr. office order was passed whereby the designation of the post of Law Officer Grade II was changed as Law Officer. The second paragraph of the said office order reads as follows.:
By virtue of this appointment Shri Satish Kumar Sharma shall be required to act and plead in any Court of Law, on behalf of the H.P. State Electricity Board.

On receipt of the said communication the Respondent issued a certificate of enrolment to the Petitioner bearing date 9-7-1984.

(2.)By office order dated 8-5-1991, the Petitioner was given ad hoc promotion to the post of Under Secretary (Legal) cum-Law Officer. The order also stated that he will continue to work in the Legal Cell of the Board's Secretariat. By a further order dated 14-1-1993 the Petitioner was promoted as Under Secretary (Legal)-cum-Law Officer on officiating . basis,
(3.)The Respondent by its communication dated 13-9-1993. called upon the Petitioner to appear before the Committee on 28-9-1993 alongwith all connected documents/evidence in regard to his enrolment as Advocate. According to the communication, in its meeting held on 10-7-1993 the Respondent had considered the matter regarding enrolment of certain Law Officers and decided to constitute a Committee to examine the matter. The Respondent sent a further communication on 27-12-1993 requiring the Petitioner to show-cause as to why his enrolment No. HIM/35/1984 issued to him to be not withdrawn. The reply was to reach the Respondent's office by 3012-1993,


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.