The Madras High Court today said the rules framed by special committee of Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, prescribing 10 years of practice as minimum eligibility to contest in the council elections, might not be wrong.
The first bench comprising Chief Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice Abdul Quddhose made the observation while hearing a plea moved by advocates G Murugendran and Selvakumar, assailing the rules.
The issue to be decided is whether the special committee has powers to frame such rules, the bench said and adjourned the hearing of the PIL for tomorrow.
On January 24, the special committee of the council had passed a resolution prescribing certain rules to govern the election, scheduled for March 28.
As per the rules, only advocates continuously practising for 10 years would be entitled to contest the election. Apart from this, lawyers punished for contempt of court and those holding official position in any political party or founder of a party, and those facing disciplinary proceedings before the state bar council, are not entitled to contest.
The petitioners submitted that the elections to the council are governed by the Bar Council of India rules and that the special committee does not have powers to amend them.
Therefore, the resolution passed by the committee incorporating new rules is in violation of statutory provisions, they said.
Denying the averments, counsel for the committee submitted that as on date, 600 complaints were pending against lawyers with the council.
It was only in an attempt to prevent entry of such lawyers into the council that such stringent rules were brought in, and were sent to the Bar Council of India for its approval, he said.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
