<p>The Delhi High Court today asked Advocate <strong>Ashok Arora</strong> and the <a href="https://www.barandbench.com/topic/supreme-court-bar-association">Supreme Court Bar Association</a> (SCBA) if they were open to mediation by a retired <a href="https://www.barandbench.com/topic/supreme-court-judge">Supreme Court judge</a> to settle their dispute <em>(Ashok Arora vs SCBA).</em></p>.<p><em>"It is acceptable, provided someone decides in a couple of days",</em> Arora said as he informed the Court that the tenure of the present office-bearers comes to an end of December 10. </p>.<p>Appearing for SCBA, Senior Advocate <strong>Arvind Nigam</strong> said he would seek instructions on this aspect. </p>.<p>A Single Judge Bench of Justice<strong> Mukta Gupta </strong>was hearing Arora's challenge<strong> </strong>to his removal from the post of Secretary of the SCBA.</p>.<p>"<em>After all, this is between the members"</em>, the Court said, indicating that the challenge may then be disposed of. </p>.<p>Following Arora's call for an Emergent General Meeting to remove Senior Advocate <strong>Dushyant Dave</strong> from the post of SCBA President, the Executive Council of SCBA had <a href="https://www.barandbench.com/news/scba-executive-committee-suspends-secretary-ashok-arora-by-majority-after-arora-seeks-ouster-of-dushyant-dave-as-president">suspended Arora</a> from the position of the Secretary with immediate effect.</p>.<p>Arora subsequently moved the High Court challenging the resolution. Last month, the High Court <a href="https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/delhi-hc-issues-summons-in-ashok-arora-suit-challenging-his-removal-from-the-post-of-secretary-scba">issued notice to SCBA and the Bar Council of India </a>(BCI), and directed them to file their written statement in three weeks.</p>.<p>Today, Arora sought an interim stay on his ouster. He contended that his removal was void <em>ab initio,</em> as it was in violation of Rule 35 of the SCBA Rules. </p>.<p>He pointed out that as per Rule 35, the power to suspend or expel a member was with the General House of the Association and same had to be decided after an inquiry into a complaint of misconduct is carried out by a committee. </p>.<p>The Executive Committee, as was done in the present case, has no power to suspend or expel a member, he said. </p>.<p>Arora further argued that "<em>all principles of natural justice were thrown to the wind</em>" as the resolution on his removal was passed under the signatures of the "interested parties" such as the Joint Secretary, Treasurer etc. </p>.<p>Referring to the letters written by certain members of the Executive Committee to Senior Advocate <strong>Kailash Vasdev</strong>, Arora also alleged that the minutes were not correctly recorded, and that in spite of the purported recusal of Dave, he continued to control the meeting. </p>.<p><em>"Electorate cannot be betrayed, which is the most important issue in this case",</em> Arora submitted. </p>.<p>After hearing Arora at length, the Court proceeded to adjourn the hearing to September 7. </p>.<p>SCBA and Bar Council of India are expected to begin their submissions on the next date. </p>.<p>Arora has also filed a <a href="https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/delhi-high-court-ashok-arora-defamation-suit-dushyant-dave-scba">defamation suit against Dave</a>, citing "mental torture" against him right from the time he was elected the Secretary of the SCBA.</p>
<p>The Delhi High Court today asked Advocate <strong>Ashok Arora</strong> and the <a href="https://www.barandbench.com/topic/supreme-court-bar-association">Supreme Court Bar Association</a> (SCBA) if they were open to mediation by a retired <a href="https://www.barandbench.com/topic/supreme-court-judge">Supreme Court judge</a> to settle their dispute <em>(Ashok Arora vs SCBA).</em></p>.<p><em>"It is acceptable, provided someone decides in a couple of days",</em> Arora said as he informed the Court that the tenure of the present office-bearers comes to an end of December 10. </p>.<p>Appearing for SCBA, Senior Advocate <strong>Arvind Nigam</strong> said he would seek instructions on this aspect. </p>.<p>A Single Judge Bench of Justice<strong> Mukta Gupta </strong>was hearing Arora's challenge<strong> </strong>to his removal from the post of Secretary of the SCBA.</p>.<p>"<em>After all, this is between the members"</em>, the Court said, indicating that the challenge may then be disposed of. </p>.<p>Following Arora's call for an Emergent General Meeting to remove Senior Advocate <strong>Dushyant Dave</strong> from the post of SCBA President, the Executive Council of SCBA had <a href="https://www.barandbench.com/news/scba-executive-committee-suspends-secretary-ashok-arora-by-majority-after-arora-seeks-ouster-of-dushyant-dave-as-president">suspended Arora</a> from the position of the Secretary with immediate effect.</p>.<p>Arora subsequently moved the High Court challenging the resolution. Last month, the High Court <a href="https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/delhi-hc-issues-summons-in-ashok-arora-suit-challenging-his-removal-from-the-post-of-secretary-scba">issued notice to SCBA and the Bar Council of India </a>(BCI), and directed them to file their written statement in three weeks.</p>.<p>Today, Arora sought an interim stay on his ouster. He contended that his removal was void <em>ab initio,</em> as it was in violation of Rule 35 of the SCBA Rules. </p>.<p>He pointed out that as per Rule 35, the power to suspend or expel a member was with the General House of the Association and same had to be decided after an inquiry into a complaint of misconduct is carried out by a committee. </p>.<p>The Executive Committee, as was done in the present case, has no power to suspend or expel a member, he said. </p>.<p>Arora further argued that "<em>all principles of natural justice were thrown to the wind</em>" as the resolution on his removal was passed under the signatures of the "interested parties" such as the Joint Secretary, Treasurer etc. </p>.<p>Referring to the letters written by certain members of the Executive Committee to Senior Advocate <strong>Kailash Vasdev</strong>, Arora also alleged that the minutes were not correctly recorded, and that in spite of the purported recusal of Dave, he continued to control the meeting. </p>.<p><em>"Electorate cannot be betrayed, which is the most important issue in this case",</em> Arora submitted. </p>.<p>After hearing Arora at length, the Court proceeded to adjourn the hearing to September 7. </p>.<p>SCBA and Bar Council of India are expected to begin their submissions on the next date. </p>.<p>Arora has also filed a <a href="https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/delhi-high-court-ashok-arora-defamation-suit-dushyant-dave-scba">defamation suit against Dave</a>, citing "mental torture" against him right from the time he was elected the Secretary of the SCBA.</p>