The Delhi High Court today dismissed Ashok Arora's appeal against order refusing to stay his removal from the post of Secretary, Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA). (Ashok Arora vs SCBA).A Division Bench of Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw and Asha Menon said, .We do not find any reason to interfere with the learned single Judge's order. The appeal is dismissed..The Court was dealing with Arora's appeal against the order passed by a Single Judge Bench of Justice Mukta Gupta in his suit against his ouster.. The Single Judge had opined that Arora had failed to make out any prima facie case in his favour for grant of injunction against his removal. .[BREAKING] Delhi HC refuses to stay the removal of Ashok Arora from the post of Secretary, SCBA.In its 10-page order, the Division Bench stated that Arora had not pointed out the fallacies in the impugned order. .Like the Single Judge, the Court stated that Arora's reliance on Rule 35 of SCBA Rules could not be sustained. .The Court further remarked that the present litigation and the stated reasons for its initiation seemed to be completely contrary to objectives of SBCA. .It said, .Though being an office-bearer of a prestigious association such as the respondent no.1/SBCA is in itself a privilege, the power that attaches to it can be an equally powerful attraction for members to contest an election. But that power or position cannot be equated to personal power and position as seems to be the norm across all Bar Associations. Intolerance of dissenting opinions, coercive and divisive action to hold on to power is becoming too commonplace for comfort. The clear springs of the Bar alone can feed the river that is the judiciary. Anything that sullies the source will defile in entirety..The Court nonetheless clarifed that it was not a reflection on anyone, least of all Arora. .Ruling that action taken in accordance with Rules and Bye-Laws of an association could not form ground for grievance, the Court concluded that the Single Judge Bench had formed the correct prima facie view. ."The affairs of the respondent no.1/SBCA cannot be allowed to be stalled only because of differences between the appellant and the rest of the office bearers. Therefore, the balance of convenience tilts in favour of the respondent no.1/SBCA.", the Court said. .Following Arora's call for an Emergent General Meeting to remove Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave from the post of SCBA President, the Executive Council of SCBA had suspended Arora from the position of the Secretary with immediate effect..Before the Single Judge as well as the Division Bench, Arora argued that his ouster was void ab initio, as it was in violation of Rule 35 of the SCBA Rules..As per Arora, the power to suspend or expel a member rested with the General House of SCBA and same had to be decided after an inquiry into a complaint of misconduct is carried out by a committee..SCBA, on the other hand, had contended that Arora's reliance on Rule 35 was misplaced as it only dealt with the issue of removal of a member..Arora appeared in person along with Advocates Arun Batta, Neha Kumari, Abdul Vahid..Senior Advocate Arvind K. Nigam with Advocate Parminder Singh appeared for SCBA. Advocate Preet Pal Singh appeared for BCI. .Read the Order:
