S.Ghouse Sardhar Hussain v. The Bar Council Of India,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27.11.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR and M.P.(MD)Nos.1 to 3 of 2009 S.Ghouse Sardhar Hussain ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Bar Council of India, represented by it's Chairman, Bar Council Bhawan, No.21, Rouse Avenue, Institutional Area, New Delhi-110 002.

2.The Bar Council of Tamil Nadu, represented by it's Chairman, High Court Campus, Chennai.

3.The Chairman, 3 Year B.L.Degree Courses, Admissions 2009-2010, Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University, Poompozhil Illam, No.5, Dr.D.G.S. Dinakaran Salai, Chennai-28.

4.The Registrar, Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University, Poompozhil Illam, No.5, Dr.D.G.S.Dinakaran Salai, Chennai-28.

5.The Director of Legal Studies, Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University, Poompozhil Illam, No.5, Dr.D.G.S. Dinakaran Salai, Chennai-28.

... Respondents PRAYER:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Declaration to declare the Rule 28 of Schedule III Part IV under the Rules of Legal Education, 2008 framed by the respondent No.1 prescribing the maximum age for admission into three years Bachelor of Law Degree Course as illegal and consequently set aside the clause 2(iii) of the Information booklet for admission to three years B.L.Degree 1/3

Course for academic year 2009-2010 issued by the respondent No.4 prescribing the maximum age for admission into three years B.L.Degree course.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Mohamed Fazil for Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy For Respondents : Mr.K.MU.Muthu Additional Government Pleader R.5 : No Appearance for R.1 to R.4

ORDER

Mr.M.Mohamed Fazil learned Counsel representing Counsel on record for writ petitioner and Mr.K.MU.Muthu, learned Additional Government Pleader on behalf of fifth respondent are before this Court, but other respondents viz., respondents 1 to 4 have been duly served and they have entered appearance through three sets of Counsel ie., one for first respondent, the other for second respondent and the third set for respondents 3 and 4. The names of Counsel have been duly shown in the cause list, but there is no representation.

2. Be that as it may, learned Counsel for writ petitioner submits that the Honourable Supreme Court is in seizen of the issue of the subject matter and the Honourable Supreme Court has passed orders dated 12.03.2019 in Writ Petition(s) (Civil) No(s).1023/2016, which reads as follows:

2/3

3. As the writ petitioner will stand governed by any decision taken by the first respondent pursuant to the aforesaid orders of the Honourable Supreme Court, it will suffice to record this position and dispose of this Writ Petition as closed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-II) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS ) SSL To The Director of Legal Studies, Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University, Poompozhil Illam, No.5, Dr.D.G.S. Dinakaran Salai, Chennai-28.

+1.CC. To Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy, Advocate in SR No.102226 +1.CC. To SPL.GOVT.PLEADER, in SR No.102386 27.11.2019 MK (13.12.2019) 3P 4C 3/3