BAR COUNCIL OF DELHI Vs. K K SUD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri Sanjay Jain and another filed writ petition on 20.7.1998 seeking direction for quashing resolution dated 19.7.1998 passed by Bar Council of Delhi by which Shri Sanjay Jain was ordered to be removed from the post of Secretary to the said Bar Council- of Delhi directing that in his place Shri Surya Prakash Khatri is appointed as Secretary. Prayer was made to quash the proceedings of 17.7.1998 and to quash notice dated 18.7.1998 by which meeting had been called by Shri Surya Prakash Khatri. The writ petition was disposed of by the impugned judgment by learned Single Judge holding that appointment of Shri Sanjay Jain as Hony. Secretary was contrary to Rules and his claim to the said office cannot be sustained. The appointment of Shri Surya Prakash Khatri was also held to be not in consonance with the Rules and as such the appointment was quashed. Feeling aggrieved, this appeal was preferred by the Bar Council of Delhi and three others including Shri Surya Prakash Khatri.

(2.) On 18.1.1999 C.M.610/99 was moved on behalf of Shri Sanjay Jain, respondent No. 8 that 14 members of the Council, who earlier had moved resolution for his removal, have reaffirmed their faith in him and passed a resolution dated 18.1.1999. Copy of the resolution passed on 18.1.1999 under the signatures of appellant Nos. 2 to 4, and respondents 9 and 12 to 22 is annexed as Annexure-A, to the said application. It is prayed in the application that the order passed by learned Single Judge on 7.8.1998 be modified to the extent to which it relates to the declaring that Hony Secretary cannot be appointed by elected Members of the Council and the writ petition be disposed of in the light of the resolution by reviving the post of Hony. Secretary and to restore the applicant Shri Sanjay Jain as Hony. Secretary of the Council.

(3.) As there was some reservation on behalf of some of the other members of the Council to the disposal of appeal in terms of the above resolution passed on 18.1.1999, arguments in the said application as also in the appeal were heard and judgment was reserved.