Shailendra Kumar Bajpai v. Arvind Sinha

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Appeal No. 472 of 2019 (Arising out of order dated 30.09.2019 passed in Writ Petition (C) No.3447 of 2019 by the learned Single Judge) Shailendra Kumar Bajpai S/o Late D.S. Bajpai Aged About 57 Years R/o Bhatiya Residency Mangla Road Bilaspur, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

---- Appellant

Versus

1. Arvind Sinha S/o Shri B.P. Sinha Aged About 59 Years Occupation Advocate, Practicing In The High Court of Chhattisgarh At Bilaspur R/o R4-9, Rama Valley, Bodri, Police Station Chakarbhata, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

2. The State Bar Council of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, High Court Premises, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

3. The Chhattisgarh High Court Bar Association Through Its Secretary, High Court, Premises Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents ________________________________________________________________ For Appellant : None.

For Respondents : None.

_________________________________________________________________ Hon'ble Shri P. R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Judgement on Board P. R. Ramachandra Menon, Chief Justice 21.10.2019 1.

This appeal arises from the interim order dated 30.09.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby such specific directions were given as to the manner in which the election to the High Court Bar Association is to be conducted as scheduled on 15.10.2019.

2.

The grievance of the Appellant who was contesting for the post of Vice President of the High Court Bar Association was that the identification of the voters with reference to the place of practice in terms of the Bar Council of India Certificate and Place of Practice (Verification) Rules, 2015 had already been done in the earlier election and hence no further steps were necessary in this regard. It is also stated that the process was already begun and as such, no interference is required or justified. 3.

When the matter was taken up for consideration in the morning, the Appellant was absent and hence we passed over the matter. In the second round as well, there is no representation.

4.

Going by the nature of relief sought for and the position revealed as on date, we are given to understand that the elections are already over and virtually, the matter has become infructuous. 5.

In the said circumstance, the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- Sd/- (P.R. Ramachandra Menon) (Parth Prateem Sahu) Chief Justice Judge Yogesh