- (1.) THIS is petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by a senior Advocate of this Court against the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh Praying for a writ of certiorari for quashing of the resolution of the Bar Council and a writ in the nature of prohibition restraining the Disciplinary Committee appointed by the said Council to further carry on proceedings against the petitioner, The petitioner awl another Advocate, against whom also similar steps have been taken by the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh, are senior Advocates practising in the High Court. Two Advocates of the High Court Saivsri G, C. Dwivcdi and N. C. Rajvanshi, who happened to be the members of the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh, sent a letter to the President of the Bar Council which translated in English is as follows: Sir, On 24-4-1970 in Court No. 12 before Hon'ble Mr. Justice Yashodanandan and Hon'ble Mr. justice Seth two advocates. . . conducted themselves in such a manner as led the two learned Judges to rise. It has been learnt that the said two advocates abused each other and were ready to assault each other. The behaviour and conduct of the said two Advocates comes within the mischief of Section 35 of the Advocates' Act. 1961. The Bar Council itself should issue notice and should hold a formal inquiry into the matter.
(2.) THIS letter is dated 16-5-1970. Then in a meeting of the Bar Council held on 9-6-1970 the following resolution was passed against item No. 1 on the Agenda: On the matter being brought to the Bar Council by Sri G. C. Dwivedi and Sri N. C. Rajvanshi this Council takes suo motu cognizance of the facts regarding the alleged conduct. . . . Advocates, Allahabad and it is hereby resolved that the copy of the letter of Sri G. C. Dwivedi be sent to the Advocates concerned and they be required to submit their version within a month on the allegations made against them.
(3.) PURSUANT to this resolution, the Secretary of the Bar Council sent a letter to the petitioner dated 30/31-7-1970 inviting from the. petitioner his version. It is said that a copy of the letter of the two Advocates complaining about the alleged misbehaviour was also appended. The petitioner by his letter dated 19-8-1970 sent his reply in the following words: The application dated 16-5-1970 accompanying your letter appears to be based on hearsay. The application itself states-Yeh pata chala hai ke upyukta demon advocates ne aapas men gali galauj ki aur marpit ki aur marpit ke liye tayyar ho gaye the. So far as the allegations about me are concerned, they are denied and it is further asserted that I did not do anything which would amount to improper conduct on the part of an Advocate. ;