Karnataka High Court Disposes of Petition Seeking Preponement of Advocates Association Elections — Guidelines Already Laid Down in Earlier Order Govern Subsequent Elections. The court held that since elections had been held in accordance with the guidelines set out in the order dated 24.04.2009, no further consideration was required.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, K.N. Subbareddy, an advocate aged 73, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to pre-pone the election to the Advocates Association, Bangalore, to February 2009. The respondents were the Advocates Association, the District Registrar of Societies Registration, and the Karnataka State Bar Council. During the consideration of the petition, the court had passed an order on 24.04.2009 laying down detailed guidelines for the conduct of elections to the respondent Association. The court noted that those guidelines were to be meticulously adhered to and that subsequent elections had already been held in the same manner. Consequently, the court found that the prayer made in the petition was regulated by the same guidelines and there was no need to consider the petition any further. The petition was disposed of in terms of the said order.

Headnote

A) Advocates Association - Election Preponement - Guidelines - The petitioner sought preponement of elections to the Advocates Association, Bangalore. The court had earlier passed an order dated 24.04.2009 laying down guidelines for conducting elections. Since subsequent elections had been held in accordance with those guidelines, the court held that no further consideration was required and disposed of the petition. (Paras 1-3)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the election to the Advocates Association should be preponed to February 2009

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Writ petition disposed of in terms of the order dated 24.04.2009; no further consideration needed as subsequent elections had been held in accordance with the guidelines laid down in that order.

Law Points

  • Elections to advocates associations must be conducted in accordance with guidelines laid down by the court
  • subsequent elections regulated by same guidelines
  • no need to consider petition after elections held
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2017 LawText (KAR) (09) 6

Writ Petition No.1952/2009 (GM-KSR)

2017-09-01

A.S. Bopanna

Sri A.R. Lokesh (for petitioner), Sri H.P. Leeladhar (for respondents)

K.N. Subbareddy

Advocates Association, Bangalore; District Registrar of Societies Registration; Karnataka State Bar Council

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition seeking preponement of election to Advocates Association

Remedy Sought

Pre-pone the election to the Advocates Association during the month of February 2009

Filing Reason

Petitioner wanted the election to be held earlier than scheduled

Previous Decisions

Court had passed an order dated 24.04.2009 laying down guidelines for conducting elections to the respondent Association

Issues

Whether the election to the Advocates Association should be preponed to February 2009

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner sought preponement of election; respondents opposed or remained silent

Ratio Decidendi

Once the court has laid down guidelines for conducting elections to an advocates association and subsequent elections have been held in accordance with those guidelines, there is no need to further consider a petition seeking preponement of elections.

Judgment Excerpts

This Court in the process of consideration of this petition through the order dated 24.04.2009 has adverted to all aspects of the matter which relates to the prayer made in this petition and has laid down the guidelines in the manner the elections are to be conducted to the respondent – Association. Since the said guidelines are to be meticulously adhered to and the elections are to be held in the same manner and also considering the fact that the subsequent elections have been held, the prayer made in this petition is also regulated by the same. Hence, there is no need to consider this petition any further at this juncture.

Procedural History

Petition filed in 2009; court passed order on 24.04.2009 laying down election guidelines; subsequent elections held; petition disposed on 01.09.2017.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Dismisses State Appeal Against Acquittal in Medical Negligence Case — No Causal Link Established Between Treatment and Death. Section 304-A IPC requires proof of rash or negligent act directly causing death; failure to prove...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Upholds Acquittal in Murder Case Due to Lack of Credible Evidence. Conviction under Section 302 IPC set aside as prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.