Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, a practicing advocate from Salem, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a mandamus to direct the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry (first respondent) to transfer a complaint dated 06.11.2022 to the Bar Council of India (second respondent) under Section 36B of the Advocates Act, 1961, and for the Bar Council of India to initiate an inquiry under Section 36(2) of the Act. The complaint alleged that the third respondent, enrolled as an advocate in 1987, had obtained enrollment using a bogus law degree certificate. The Bar Council of Tamil Nadu had sent the mark statements to Bangalore University for verification, but the university had not responded. Since more than one year had elapsed from the date of the complaint, the petitioner argued that the Bar Council was statutorily required to transfer the complaint to the Bar Council of India. The court impleaded the Registrar of Bangalore University as the fourth respondent, but the university did not appear. The court held that under Section 36B of the Advocates Act, if a State Bar Council fails to dispose of a complaint within one year, it must transfer the complaint to the Bar Council of India. Accordingly, the court directed the first respondent to transfer the complaint to the second respondent within two weeks, and the second respondent to initiate an inquiry under Section 36(2) and file an action taken report within three months. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.
Headnote
A) Advocates Act - Transfer of Complaint - Section 36B - Mandatory Transfer - Where a State Bar Council fails to dispose of a complaint within one year, it is bound to transfer the complaint to the Bar Council of India for further inquiry - The court held that since one year had expired without disposal, the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu must forward the complaint to the Bar Council of India (Paras 3-4). B) Advocates Act - Inquiry by Bar Council of India - Section 36(2) - Power to Initiate Inquiry - Upon transfer under Section 36B, the Bar Council of India is empowered to conduct an inquiry into the complaint - The court directed the Bar Council of India to initiate inquiry and file an action taken report (Paras 4-5). C) Writ Jurisdiction - Mandamus - Statutory Duty - Article 226 of Constitution of India - A writ of mandamus lies to compel a statutory authority to perform its duty - The court issued mandamus directing the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu to transfer the complaint and the Bar Council of India to initiate inquiry (Paras 4-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry is obligated to transfer the complaint dated 06.11.2022 to the Bar Council of India under Section 36B of the Advocates Act, 1961, and whether the Bar Council of India must initiate inquiry under Section 36(2) of the Act.
Final Decision
The court directed the first respondent (Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry) to transfer the complaint dated 06.11.2022 to the second respondent (Bar Council of India) within two weeks. The second respondent was directed to initiate inquiry under Section 36(2) of the Advocates Act, 1961, and file an action taken report before this court within three months. The writ petition was disposed of.
Law Points
- Section 36B of Advocates Act
- 1961 mandates transfer of complaint to Bar Council of India if State Bar Council fails to dispose of complaint within one year
- Section 36(2) empowers Bar Council of India to initiate inquiry
- Writ of Mandamus lies to compel statutory duty
