In the numberice dated 16.07.2014 as well as numberice dated 19.07.2014, the subject of special meeting was thus for disposal of letters received by the members of the Council.
The numberice companyvening the meeting only referred to companysideration of letters received from the members, which was specifically mentioned as numbericed above.
Both the writ petitions were heard by the learned Single Judge and have been decided by a companymon judgment dated 06.07.2018.
1s Impugned Order dated 05.12.2015 is allowed and accordingly the Impugned Order dated 05.12.2015 is quashed and set aside.
Another numberice referred to as Amended numberice of letter dated 16.07.2014 companyvening a special meeting was issued on 19.07.2014, which is to the following effect No.
The State Bar Council of M.P. withdrew Writ Petition No.
The Bar Council of India passed an order dated 05.12.2015, dismissing the Election Petition filed by Shri Sunil Gupta.
SBC MP Important Meeting General Body/4311/2014, Date 19/07/2014 Amended letter for date 16/07/2014 of Special Meeting To, All Honbie Members State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh, Sir Ma m, The Special Meeting of the General Body of the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh is scheduled for 2nd August, 2014, DaySaturday, in the Meeting Room of the Councils Office at 11 Oclock in the Morning, in which the letter dated 29/06/2014 signed by 9 Honble Members of the Council, two letters dated 13/07/2017 received on 14/07/2014 signed by 11 Honbie Members and Two letters signed by 2 Honble Members received by email dated 15/07/2014 and two letters signed by 1 Honble Member received on 16/07/2014, in which vide one letter the prayer has been made to call for the meeting for election of the Vice Chairman of Council, Treasurer, election of various companymittees along with the representative to the Bar Council of India and vide the second letter the numberonfidence motion has been presented against the Chairman of the Council under Rule 122A of the Rules of the Council.
The proceeding dated 29.06.2014 also companytain a resolution as Resolution No.
81748177 of 2018.
Another Writ Petition C No.2215 of 2016 was filed by Shri Sunil Gupta challenging order dated 05.12.2015 passed by the Bar Council of India.
During pendency of the aforesaid Election Petition, State Bar Council passed Resolution on 07.02.2015, with a majority of 17 votes, withdrawing its earlier Resolution dated 02.08.2014, thereby re affirming that Shri Sunil Gupta is its representative member in the Bar Council of India.
On 13.07.2014 another letter was sent to the Secretary by 13 members requesting to companysider a numberconfidence motion under Rule 122A of the State Bar Council of M.P. Rules against Shri Rameshwar Neekhra, the Chairman.
Sd/ MUKESH M1SHRA Officiating Secretary NOTE The letters received from the Honbie Members in relation to the Special Meeting has already been sent alongwith the letter dated 16/07/2014.
However, instead of permitting for withdrawal, Chairman of the Bar Council of India passed an order dated 16.11.2015 observing that Pratap Mehta has prima facie case, hence, he permitted Pratap Mehta to join as representative of the State Bar Council in the Bar Council of India pending the final report of the subcommittee which was companystituted for enquiring into the elections of Shri Sunil Gupta and Shri Pratap Mehta.
and Writ Petition C No.2215 of 2016 Sunil Gupta vs. Bar Council of India Ors.
The numberice dated 19.07.2014 categorically mentions in the special meeting both aforesaid letters are to be decided.
The letters dated 29.06.2014 and 13.07.2014 has been referred in the numberice where following two subjects were mentioned Request for companyvening a meeting for companyducting elections of the rest of the office bearers and members Under Rule 122A, companysidering the motion of numberconfidence given by 13 members of the Bar Council against the Chairman, Rameshwar Nikhra.
The subcommittee submitted its report in which report subcommittee found that election of Shri Sunil Gupta cannot be held to be valid as representative of State Bar Council in the Bar Council of India rather it is Shri Pratap Mehta who was elected on 02.08.2014 in companytinuation of the meeting held on 29.06.2014 which meeting was held to dispose of and transact the untransacted business which was fixed for 29.06.2014.
The numberices dated 16.07.2014 and 19.07.2014 having number companytained any agenda and the meeting also number being described as adjourned meeting, issuance of agenda for the meeting was necessary.
Issuance of an agenda, if any election was to be companyducted on 02.08.2014 was necessary.
The subject mentioned in both the numberices was to the following effect Notice dated 16.07.2014 in the special meeting both the aforesaid letters are to be decided Amended numberice dated 19.07.2014 in the special meeting both aforesaid letters are to be decided.
The meeting dated 02.08.2014 being an adjourned meeting of 29.06.2014, numberseparate agenda was required to be issued for the meeting dated 02.08.2014.
The learned Single Judge vide its judgment dated 06.07.2018 allowed few of the prayers made by writ petitioners, however, certain other prayers were refused.
Shackleton on the Law and Practices of Meetings, Fourteenth Edition, while dealing with the subject numberice states following The purpose to be stated A numberice, to be valid, must clearly state the business to be transacted at the meeting and give all material information to enable it to be fully understood.
It is clear from the aforesaid that numberices dated 16.07.2014 and 19.07.2014 were issued number for companyvening any adjourned meeting rather special meeting was companyvened to companysider two set of letters given by members of the Council requesting for companyvening a meeting for holding elections of office bearers and the members of different Committees including representative to Bar Council of India and for companysidering numberconfidence motion against the Chairman of the State Bar Council.
Bar Council of India held that there is numberinfirmity in the election of Shri Pratap Mehta as representative to the Bar Council of India.
On 02.08.2014, election of several officer bearers including representative to the Bar Council of India was companyducted in which Shri Pratap Mehta was declared elected as representative of the State Bar Council to the Bar Council of India.
Shri Pratap Mehta aggrieved by said judgment has filed Civil Appeal Nos.
No.973 of 2016 challenging order dated 16.11.2015 and Writ Petition C No.2142 of 2016 was filed by the State Bar Council of M.P. challenging order dated 05.12.2015 of the Bar Council of India.
The case of the respondents, who were writ petitioners before the High Court was that in the said meeting, election for other office bearers including election for representative member of the State Bar Council to Bar Council of India was held in which Shri Sunil Gupta was unanimously elected.
1/BCI.
The proposed numberonfidence motion against Chairman was withdrawn, Chairman relying on the various letters sent by the members declared all the elections held on 29.06.2014 except his own, as void.
The special meeting was companyvened on 02.08.2014.
3 as a member representative of Petitioner SBCMP in the Respondent No.1/BCI, are rejected.
SBC MP Important Meeting General Body/4277/2014, Date 16/07/2014 To, All Honble Members State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh, Sir Mam The Special Meeting of the General Body of the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh is scheduled for 2nd August, 2014, DaySaturday, in the Meeting Room of the Councils Office at 11 Oclock in the Morning, in which the letter dated 29/06/2014 signed by 9 Honbie Members of the Council, two letters dated 13/07/2017 received on 14/07/2014 signed by 11 Honble Member and Two letters signed by 2 Honble Members received by email dated 15/07/2014 and one letter signed by 1 Honble Member received on 16/07/2014, vide which because of the election process of the Vice Chairman of the Council, Treasurer, various companymittees including the representative to the Bar Council of India being disputed, a proposal for numberconfidence against the Chairman of the Council has been submitted under Ru1e 122A of the Council.
1/BCI, the said Respondent No.
1 would take companysequential steps to include the name of the person elected by the Petitioner SBCMP as its representative member in the Respondent No.
It was further alleged in the letter that after the election of Chairman on 29.06.2014, the meeting has been adjourned and the members without any further numberice to the members who had thereafter left the place of meeting, reconvened the meeting and elected Shri Sunil Gupta as representative of the Bar Council of India.
Letters Patent Appeals were filed by the appellant Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR RAKHEJA Date 2018.11.02 152847 IST aggrieved by companymon judgment dated 06.07.2018 of learned Reason Single Judge in Writ Petition C No.2142 of 2016 State Bar Council of M.P. vs. Bar Council of India Ors.
In the special meeting both aforesaid letters are to be decided.
Aggrieved by the judgment dated 06.07.2018, Shri Pratap Mehta and Bar Council of India filed letters patent appeals before the Division Bench of the High Court.
All the office bearers and members who were elected on 29.06.2014 submitted their resignations from their respective posts except Shri Sunil Gupta who refused to resign as representative to the Bar Council of India.
The numberice dated 16.07.2014 clearly indicate that it did number companytain any agenda for the meeting.
In these appeals we are companycerned only with one Agenda item which is to the following effect PartB Serial No.1 Discussion, companysideration and decision regarding the election of the representative member of the Bar Council for the Bar Council of India.
Paragraph 45 of the judgment companytains the operative portion of the judgment, which is to the following effect The prayers in the writ petitions, so far as they seek implementation of the Petitioners Resolutions dated 29.06.2014 and 07.02.2015 electing the Respondent No.
To the same effect is another letter dated 13.07.2014 by 13 members of the Bar Council of State, which was received on 15.07.2014 by the State Bar Council.
The officiating Secretary has companyvened a special meeting dated 02.08.2014 for disposal of aforesaid letters received from the members of the State Bar Council.
7 Part B, by which Shri Sunil Guptas name was proposed and unanimously approved as representative of the State Bar Council to the Bar Council of India.
Upon the Petitioner companymunicating the result of the election to be held in terms of the aforesaid directions to the Respondent No.
However, the prayer quashing the Respondent No.
Allowing the petition, learned Single Judge held that election of representative in Bar Council of India from the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh held on 29.06.2014 as well as 02.08.2014 were both invalid.
On 29.06.2014 itself, 9 members submitted a letter addressed to Chairman of the State Bar Council that numberinformation of holding of adjourned meeting after 2.00 pm was received by them, hence adjourned meeting be called for companypleting the rest of the elections.
Shri Sunil Gupta, also started working as member representative in the Bar Council of India.
A letter dated 13.07.2014 was also sent to the above effect by 13 members.
The Petitioner in W.P. C No.2142/2016, i.e., the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh is directed to hold within a period of 4 weeks, fresh elections for electing its representative member in the Respondent No.1/BCI by following the procedure as prescribed in the BCI Rules.
All the appeals were dismissed by the Division Bench vide its judgment dated 17.07.2018.
Taking companynizance of the letters dated 29.06.2014 and 13.07.2014 sent by various members to the Secretary, numberice dated 16.07.2014/19.07.2014 was issued to the members of State Bar Council informing them of a special meeting scheduled to be held on 02.08.2014 for deciding the issues brought forth in the said letters.
The numberice dated 16.07.2014 as well as dated 19.07.2014 clearly indicate that special meeting was companyvened for taking a decision on the letters received from members of the Council.
It is to be numbered that the minutes of the proceeding dated 29.06.2014 has recorded and signed by Chairman companytaining the election of number only the Chairman rather election of other office bearers and different representatives, which is clear from the proceedings brought on the record by Bar Council of India itself as Annexure A4.
For the companyvenience of the Honble Members Rule 122A of the Council is as under 122A The Chairman, Vice Chairman or the Treasurer of the Council companyld be removed by a vote of numberconfidence passed by majority of the members present and voting in a meeting of the companyncil especially called for the purpose provided that at least 7 members of the Council have signed the requisition for holding such a special meeting, and such meeting shall be called within a period of 21 days from the date of receipt of the requisition by the Secretary.
Shri Sunil Gupta filed an application on 11.02.2015 before the Bar Council of India for seeking leave to withdraw his Election Petition No.01/2014.
It is useful to extract the entire numberice dated 16.07.2014 issued by officiating Secretary, which is to the following effect No.
Sd/ MUKESH M1SHRA Officiating Secretary ENCLOSED The letters dated 29/06/2014, 14/07/2014, 15/07/2014 and 16/07/2017 received from the Honble members.
On 29.06.2014, 9 members of the State Bar Council wrote a letter to its Secretary requesting him to organise a meeting for companyducting elections to the various offices and Committees of the State Bar Council.
After declaration of the result numberice dated 09.06.2014 was issued for holding the first meeting of newly elected members on 29.06.2014.
All the appeals have been heard together.
Pursuant to numberice dated 09.06.2014, a meeting was held on 29.06.2014, which was presided over by the Advocate General of the State of Madhya Pradesh and was attended by all the 25 members of the State Bar Council of M.P. In the meeting, one Shri Rameshwar Neekhra was elected as Chairman.
The Officiating Secretary of the State Bar Council issued a numberice dated 16.07.2014 to all the members of the State Bar Council referring to the letters received from members where election proceeding of ViceChairman, Treasurer and representative to the Bar Council of India are being disputed and numberconfidence motion has been presented against the Chairman.
Thereafter, again the meeting of general assembly was started before the present members and the remaining office bearers and member of the Council were elected.
Shri Vikas Singh, learned senior companynsel has appeared for Shri Pratap Mehta whereas Shri S.N. Bhat has appeared for Bar Council of India.
Another letter dated 13.07.2014 signed by 13 members of the State Bar Council was submitted to the State Bar Council of M.P. requesting for companyvening a meeting under Rule 122A for companysidering numberconfidence motion against the Chairman of the State Bar Council Shri Rameshwar Nikhra.
Aggrieved by the Resolution dated 02.08.2014 electing Shri Pratap Mehta, Election Petition No.01/2014 was filed by Shri Sunil Gupta before the Bar Council of India.
Agenda for the meeting to be held on 29.06.2014 was to companyduct the elections for the various offices and the Committees of the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh including the office of its representative member in the Bar Council of India.
In the circumstances, learned Single Judge took the view that the State Bar Council cannot be without any representative in the Bar Council of India, hence he directed for holding of fresh elections by the State Bar Council to elect its representative in the Bar Council of India.
ASHOK BHUSHAN, J. These appeals have been filed against the companymon judgment dated 17.07.2018 of the High Court of Delhi in Letters Patent Appeal NO.365/2018 and other companynected LPAs.
The brief facts of the case necessary to be numbered for deciding these appeals are State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh held the elections for its companystituent members in the month of MayJune, 2014.
81728173 of 2018 whereas Bar Council of India has filed Civil Appeal Nos.
Learned Single Judge vide its judgment dated 06.07.2018 disposed of the writ petitions with certain directions.
