Sheo Prasad Sahu, Advocate v. The Secretary, Bar Council Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17044 of 2023 ====================================================== Sheo Prasad Sahu, Advocate Son of Late Rameshwar Bhagat, President, District Bar Association, Supaul, Resident of Ward No. 11, Near Children Park, Nagar Parishad, Supaul, District - Supaul. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Secretary, Bar Council of India New Delhi. 2.

The Executive Committee, Bihar State Bar Council headed by Chairman, Bihar State Bar Council, Patna.

3.

The Secretary, Bihar State Bar Council, Patna. 4.

The Senior -most Vice President , District Bar Association, Supaul. 5.

The General Secretary, District Bar Association, Supaul. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dhananjay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Vishwajeet Kumar Mishra, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 20-08-2024 The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:- "(i). For quashing Agenda No. 4, contained in Ref. No. 2002-2004/23 dated 06.09.2023 whereby as per resolution No. 1 dated 31.08.2023, and the decision of the General Body, District Bar Association, Supaul dated 02.09.2023, the petitioner has been removed from the post of President on the ground of proven misconduct. (ii). For directing the respondent No. 1 to dispose off the Revision Case (R.P. No. 77 of 2023), pending before the Respondent No. 1.

(iii). During pendency of the present writ application/ revision application the operation of the impugned order dated 06.09.2023, passed vide Agenda No. 4, contained

Patna High Court CWJC No.17044 of 2023(4) dt.20-08-2024 2/2 in Ref. No. 2002- 2004/23 be stayed."

2. At the outset, the learned counsel for the respondents no.2 and 3 has submitted that since tenure of the District Bar Association, Supaul, i.e. of two years, is already over and an ad hoc committee has been constituted, the present writ petition has been rendered infructuous.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if it be so, the present writ petition be disposed off. 4.

Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of as having rendered infructuous.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) kanchan/- U