Tushar Chanda v. Union of India and 3 Ors

JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)

¶1This instant writ petition had been instituted by the petitioner due to the inaction of the respondent No. 2 in transferring the name of the writ petitioner to the roll of the Bar Council of Meghalaya. In the course of the proceedings, the petition's grievances have since been redressed and the transfer as far as he is concerned, has been affected.

¶2However, Mr. S.Chakrawarty, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. E.Laloo, learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that this problem is not confined to the writ petitioner alone, but concerns a large number of advocates numbering 287 from the State of Meghalaya whose

transfers are yet to be effected by the Bar Council of India or Bar Council of Assam etc. He submits that as the issue is of grave importance to all the advocates practicing within the jurisdiction of Meghalaya that the scope of this writ be enlarged and directions be issued to the respondents No. 2 and 3 to expedite the process.

¶3Mr. K.S.Kynjing, who is the Chairman of the Meghalaya Bar Council is present in Court today and has also voiced his concern in this regard.

¶4This Court having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties which is for the benefit of the members, and on perusing the affidavit of the respondent No. 4 Meghalaya State Bar Council has noted that at Annexure-1 of the said affidavit, a communication dated 23-09-2017, from the respondent No. 2 addressed to the respondent No. 4 has enclosed the names of the advocates who have opted for transfer, but the same is yet to be effected.

¶5On these facts and circumstances, this Court deems the instant case to be a fit case to expand the scope of this writ petition, and accordingly directs the respondent No.2 as far as the list dated 23-09-2017 is concerned, and also the respondent No. 3 for any other names that might have escaped, to expedite the process of transfer in order that the advocates

practicing within the jurisdiction of the State of Meghalaya not suffer. As the order has been passed in the absence of the respondent No. 2, let a copy of this order be supplied by the registry. It is expected that the process be completed expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of this order.

¶6With the above directions, matter stands closed and disposed of.

Judge

Date: 2025.03.13 17:08:19 IST

Serial No.04 Supp. List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG WP(C). No. 246 of 2024 Date of Decision : 13.03.2025 Shri. Tushar Chanda …Petitioner -Versus- 1. Union of India Ministry of Law & Justice represented by its Secretary, New Delhi. 2. Bar Council of India 21 Rose Avenue, INST Area, New Delhi represented by its Secretary. 3. Bar Council of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Mizoram & Nagaland, Guwahati High Court Complex, M.G.Road, Guwahati, represented by its Secretary. 4. Bar Council of Meghalaya represented by its Chairman in the premises of the Meghalaya High Court Bar Association, M.G.Road, Shillong. …Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice H.S.Thangkhiew, Judge Appearance: For the Petitioner/Applicant(s) : Mr. S.Charkrawarty, Sr. Adv. with Mr. E.Laloo, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : None for R 1 & 2. Mr. B.Pathak, Adv. for R 3 Mr. G.Syngkrem, Adv.for R 4. i) Whether approved for reporting in Law journals etc: ii) Whether approved for publication in press: