news details |
|
|
| DB Quashes Bar Council Order, Restores Advocate’s Enrollment | | | Early Times Report
Jammu, Sept 2: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has set aside the Bar Council’s order cancelling the provisional license of Advocate John Mohammad Wani, holding the action as arbitrary and contrary to procedure.
A Division Bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani and Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi directed that Wani be treated as enrolled with the State Bar Council from December 31, 2019, to March 27, 2023, the date he assumed charge as Prosecuting Officer in the Government service.
Wani was provisionally enrolled as an advocate in December 2019 after completing his integrated law degree from the Central University of Kashmir. His license was extended periodically, the last extension being valid up to March 2024.
In October 2022, Wani submitted his final law degree and applied for conversion of his provisional license into a permanent one.
While this application remained pending, he was selected as Prosecuting Officer by the J&K Public Service Commission and formally appointed on March 27, 2023.
Subsequently, on August 5, 2024, the Bar Council cancelled his provisional license citing Rule 49 of the Bar Council of India Rules, which prohibits advocates from practicing law while in full-time salaried employment.
Represented by Senior Advocate Syed Faisal Qadri with Advocate Mariya Ashraf, the petitioner contended that the Bar Council acted without jurisdiction. The license was cancelled despite his application for permanent enrollment being pending well before his appointment in government service.
It was further argued that the Bar Council failed to invoke disciplinary procedures under Section 35 of the Advocates Act and that the impugned order deprived him of recognition for the practice he had undertaken from 2019 to 2023.
Appearing for the Bar Council, Advocate Shah Aamir maintained that the petitioner ceased to be an advocate the moment he joined government service. The Council held that his provisional enrollment had expired in March 2024 and his claim for permanent enrollment was devoid of merit. The Bar Council also alleged that the petitioner concealed his appointment in government service and submitted documents in a manner contrary to rules. The Bench, after examining the sequence of events, observed that the Bar Council had delayed processing the petitioner’s application for a permanent license for over five months before his appointment. The court held that such delay could not be attributed to the petitioner. While Rule 49 bars simultaneous practice and government service, the judges said the proper course was to restrict his right of practice from the date of his appointment and not to retrospectively cancel his enrollment. “The impugned order and notification are unreasonable to say the least,” the court remarked, adding that the Bar Council’s action ignored the principles of natural justice and fair play.
Allowing the writ petition, the High Court quashed Order No. 1202 of 2024 and Notification No. 1677 of 2024, restoring Wani’s enrollment as an advocate from his initial date of registration in 2019 until March 27, 2023, when he formally joined government service. (JNF) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
