M.Suresh Muniraj v. The Bar Council Of Tamil Nadu And Pondicherry

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 09.12.2022 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD M.Suresh Muniraj .. Petitioner

Versus

1. The Bar Council of Tamilnadu and Puducherry, Rep.by its Secretary, Madras High Court Campus, Chennai - 600 104.

2. The Chairperson, Enrolment Committee, Bar Council of Tamilnadu and Puducherry, Madras High Court Campus, Chennai - 600 104.

3. The Superintendent of Police, Namakkal District, Namakkal - 637 003.

.. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 & 2 to permit the petitioner to 1/5

enrolment as an Advocate on the roll of Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry, within the time limit to be stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner :

Mr.T.Mohan for Mr.S.Jim Raj Milton For R1 & R2 :

Mr.C.K.Chandrasekaran

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by R. MAHADEVAN, J.) Heard Mr.T.Mohan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.C.K.Chandrasekaran, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2. 2.The prayer made in this writ petition is to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to enroll the petitioner as an Advocate in the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, within a time frame to be stipulated by this court.

3.It is the case of the petitioner that he has completed LLB degree and made application on 23.02.2022 seeking to enrol him as an Advocate before the 2/5

Bar council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, enclosing the relevant certificates and undertaking affidavits. However, his name was not considered for enrolment by the respondents 1 and 2, citing pendency of the criminal cases against him. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this court with the present writ petition.

4. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the averments made in the writ petition that the petitioner has been false implicated in the criminal cases and he has nothing to do with the alleged offence, he ultimately submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied, if a direction is issued to the respondents, to consider his application dated 23.02.2022, on merits and in accordance with law, within a time frame to be stipulated by this court, for which, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents has no serious objection.

5. Considering the limited scope of the prayer now sought for by the petitioner, without expressing any opinion on the claim made by the petitioner, there shall be a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the petitioner's application, dated 23.02.2022 and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in 3/5

accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

[R.M.D., J.] [J.S.N.P., J.] 09.12.2022 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No av To

1. The Secretary, The Bar Council of Tamilnadu and Puducherry, Madras High Court Campus, Chennai - 600 104.

2. The Chairperson, Enrollment Committee, Bar Council of Tamilnadu and Puducherry, Madras High Court Campus, Chennai - 600 104.

3. The Superintendent of Police, Namakkal District, Namakkal - 637 003.

4/5

R. MAHADEVAN, J.

and J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD , J.

av 09.12.2022 5/5