The Tamil Nadu Bar Council recently reiterated that membership to a Bar Association cannot be denied by the concerned Association arbitrarily..This order follows a similar direction issued by the Bar Council in June this year that no Bar Association can deny membership to a practicing advocate for reasons not “known to law.”.The latest order, passed last week by Enrolment Committee members Senior Advocate R Singaravelan and Advocate N Chandrasekaran, states,.“We are not against the admission of any new member of the Association. But we make it clear that no Bar Association however oldest and superior it may be can arbitrarily ignore the application for Membership of any advocate and choose another without following any uniform rule of law and without assigning any reasons. The Bar Associations are given a status and place by the court concerned and it is functioning in the court premises. (sic)”.The observations were made while dealing with three complaints raising grievance that a recent selection of 25 new members to the Madras Bar Association (MBA) was carried out arbitrarily, without following any disclosed norms. The Madras Bar Association is the oldest Bar Association at the Madras High Court. Admission to the Association is based on referrals by existing members..A complaint preferred by Advocate NGR Prasad, also a member of the MBA, questioned the non-admission of an advocate proposed by him. Two other complaints were preferred by advocates Pitty Parthasarathy and Mohan Ranganathan. They had also called on the Bar Council to defer MBA elections conducted in April this year, in view of the controversy over the selection of members..Another advocate, Mohandoss, also sought impleadment in the matter, contending that he was not even able to get an application for admission into the MBA and that he was treated as an “untouchable.” He further complained that his 2010 application for membership is yet to be considered. .Mohandoss also informed the Council of an incident where an advocate was humiliated when he attempted to drink water from a facility instituted by the MBA. Expressing its dismay at the allegation, the Council responded,.“We are really shocked to hear such news from Thiru. Mohandoss Advocate and really it created a doubt in our mind as to whether we are completely relieved from the clutches of British Rule or not?”.The large issue of non-transparent selection of members prompted the Council to remark,.“We are surprised to note that without even any guideline and without even following any rule of law 25 Advocates among hundreds were chosen and they were admitted as members of the Madras Bar Association.“.However, the order goes on to note that the incumbent MBA President, Senior Advocate ARL Sundaresan assured the Council that the new members were selected only after a verification of their professional details. In view of the same, it was intimated that the admission cannot be questioned..All the same, the Council reiterated that since all advocates have a legal right to be part of a Bar Association of their choice located where they ordinarily practice, “no Bar Association can deny the membership to an advocate without any valid and sustainable reasons.“.The Council proceeded to highlight that once an application is made for admission to a particular Bar Association, it has a duty to consider the same..“… it is the duty of the concerned Association to verify the antecedents of the applicant and admit them as a member on payment of just and reasonable subscription fee. It can neither fix any exorbitant subscription fees to defeat the right of membership nor reject the application on arbitrary, unfair and unreasonable norms or demands….The Bar Associations can neither fix any restriction for admission of membership nor prohibit totally the membership…the membership is the right of an advocate and not the privilege of an association.“.The Council has emphasised that the MBA should ensure that uniform guidelines are followed in the selection of members. Taking critical note of the allegations raised by the complainant, the Council observed,.“When the oldest and reputed Bar Association of a Chartered High Court chooses to behave like this which Association can be expected to follow the rule of law … The reputed associations are bound to prove their reputation by following uniform rule of law not only to it members but to all. The Bar Associations are meant to give place for juniors and train them in the field of law for the strongest and independent judiciary.“.The Council also added that the order is only meant to remind the Bar Associations of their obligations when it comes to member admissions..The matter was disposed of by recording an undertaking made by recently elected MBA Secretary, Advocate M Baskar, that the Association would consider all pending applications for membership to the Bar Association. The admission of the 25 members as well as the recent election results were not interfered with. The Council concluded its order by noting,.“In fine the complaint stands disposed of leaving the entire matter to the conscience of the right minded learned members of the Bar to decide about the plight of our professional nobility, name and fame.”.[Read Bar Council Order]
The Tamil Nadu Bar Council recently reiterated that membership to a Bar Association cannot be denied by the concerned Association arbitrarily..This order follows a similar direction issued by the Bar Council in June this year that no Bar Association can deny membership to a practicing advocate for reasons not “known to law.”.The latest order, passed last week by Enrolment Committee members Senior Advocate R Singaravelan and Advocate N Chandrasekaran, states,.“We are not against the admission of any new member of the Association. But we make it clear that no Bar Association however oldest and superior it may be can arbitrarily ignore the application for Membership of any advocate and choose another without following any uniform rule of law and without assigning any reasons. The Bar Associations are given a status and place by the court concerned and it is functioning in the court premises. (sic)”.The observations were made while dealing with three complaints raising grievance that a recent selection of 25 new members to the Madras Bar Association (MBA) was carried out arbitrarily, without following any disclosed norms. The Madras Bar Association is the oldest Bar Association at the Madras High Court. Admission to the Association is based on referrals by existing members..A complaint preferred by Advocate NGR Prasad, also a member of the MBA, questioned the non-admission of an advocate proposed by him. Two other complaints were preferred by advocates Pitty Parthasarathy and Mohan Ranganathan. They had also called on the Bar Council to defer MBA elections conducted in April this year, in view of the controversy over the selection of members..Another advocate, Mohandoss, also sought impleadment in the matter, contending that he was not even able to get an application for admission into the MBA and that he was treated as an “untouchable.” He further complained that his 2010 application for membership is yet to be considered. .Mohandoss also informed the Council of an incident where an advocate was humiliated when he attempted to drink water from a facility instituted by the MBA. Expressing its dismay at the allegation, the Council responded,.“We are really shocked to hear such news from Thiru. Mohandoss Advocate and really it created a doubt in our mind as to whether we are completely relieved from the clutches of British Rule or not?”.The large issue of non-transparent selection of members prompted the Council to remark,.“We are surprised to note that without even any guideline and without even following any rule of law 25 Advocates among hundreds were chosen and they were admitted as members of the Madras Bar Association.“.However, the order goes on to note that the incumbent MBA President, Senior Advocate ARL Sundaresan assured the Council that the new members were selected only after a verification of their professional details. In view of the same, it was intimated that the admission cannot be questioned..All the same, the Council reiterated that since all advocates have a legal right to be part of a Bar Association of their choice located where they ordinarily practice, “no Bar Association can deny the membership to an advocate without any valid and sustainable reasons.“.The Council proceeded to highlight that once an application is made for admission to a particular Bar Association, it has a duty to consider the same..“… it is the duty of the concerned Association to verify the antecedents of the applicant and admit them as a member on payment of just and reasonable subscription fee. It can neither fix any exorbitant subscription fees to defeat the right of membership nor reject the application on arbitrary, unfair and unreasonable norms or demands….The Bar Associations can neither fix any restriction for admission of membership nor prohibit totally the membership…the membership is the right of an advocate and not the privilege of an association.“.The Council has emphasised that the MBA should ensure that uniform guidelines are followed in the selection of members. Taking critical note of the allegations raised by the complainant, the Council observed,.“When the oldest and reputed Bar Association of a Chartered High Court chooses to behave like this which Association can be expected to follow the rule of law … The reputed associations are bound to prove their reputation by following uniform rule of law not only to it members but to all. The Bar Associations are meant to give place for juniors and train them in the field of law for the strongest and independent judiciary.“.The Council also added that the order is only meant to remind the Bar Associations of their obligations when it comes to member admissions..The matter was disposed of by recording an undertaking made by recently elected MBA Secretary, Advocate M Baskar, that the Association would consider all pending applications for membership to the Bar Association. The admission of the 25 members as well as the recent election results were not interfered with. The Council concluded its order by noting,.“In fine the complaint stands disposed of leaving the entire matter to the conscience of the right minded learned members of the Bar to decide about the plight of our professional nobility, name and fame.”.[Read Bar Council Order]
