Madras HC grants interim stay on directive mandating Advocates’ Gown in NCLT

The Madras High Court has granted an interim stay on the recent directive of the Registrar, National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) making it mandatory for the President, Members and appearing lawyers to wear the gown worn by Advocates in the Tribunal..A Division Bench of Justices TS Sivagnanam and K Ravichandrababu allowed a prayer for interim stay made by petitioner Advocate R Rajesh. Senior Advocate Arvindh Pandian made arguments on behalf of the petitioner..On November 14 this year, the Registrar of the NCLT had issued a circular that read,.“In addition to the dress code already approved vide order dated 2.8.2016 wearing of gown would be necessary w.e.f. 20th November 2017 in all benches of NCLT for Hon’ble President, Members and Advocates.“.The same was challenged as being arbitrary, unconstitutional and beyond the powers of the Registrar as defined in Rule 17 of the NCLT Rules..The petitioner pointed out that the NCLT is governed primarily by the Company Laws Act, 2013 and the NCLT Rules of 2016. Rule 124 of the same provides,.“Professional dress for the authorised representatives – while appearing before the Tribunal, the authorised representatives shall wear the same professional dress as prescribed in their Code of Conduct.“.As far as Advocates are concerned, their professional conduct (including the manner in which they are expected to dress) is governed by the Bar Council of India (BCI) through Section 49 of the Advocates Act, 1961..In particular, Section 49 (1) (gg) lays down that the BCI may make rules on..“…the form of dresses or robes to be worn by advocates having regard to the climatic conditions, appearing before any court or tribunal….”.Accordingly, the BCI has framed certain Rules in this regard under Part VI, Chapter IV of the BCI Rules, titled Forms of dresses or robes to be worn by Advocates..These Rules, in addition to mentioning the type of robes to be worn by advocates while appearing before courts and tribunals, also provides for the following exception:.“Wearing of Advocates’ gown shall be optional except when appearing in the Supreme Court of in High Courts.“.The impugned order, on the other hand, makes it mandatory to wear the gown before the NCLT. It thus contradicts the above exception clause. The petition notes that,.“A harmonious reading of the Advocates Act, 1961 and the Bar Council of India Rules along with Sec 432 of the Companies Act, 2013, Rule 124 of the NCLT Rules and order of the 2nd respondent dt 02.08.2016 clearly indicates that the Advocates need not wear gown while appearing before the Tribunals hence under such circumstances it is inappropiate…”.Reference has also been made to an order issued in August 2, 2016, which had directed that,.“…every authorised representative as provided in sec. 432 of the Act shall appear before the Tribunal in his/her professional dress if any...”.With regard to the term Professional Dress, the petitioner has pointed out that.The rules regarding the professional dress of advocates is governed by the relevant BCI rulesThere may be Members, including Technical Members, who do not belong to the Legal Profession. The impugned order does not make any exception for such persons..The petition also notes that prior to the constitution of the NCLT in 2016, there was no such compulsion upon Advocates to wear the gown before the erstwhile Company Law Board..It has been further contended that the imposition made by the Registrar through the impugned circular infringes on the freedom to practice one’s profession under Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution..Referring to the impugned order as inappropriate, mischievous and indicative of an attempt to usurp the powers of the BCI, the petitioner has therefore prayed that the Court declare the impugned order as ultra vires, null and void and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and devoid of merit..The case will be taken up next on January 22, 2018..Read Order below..Read Affidavit below.