CWP No.17116 of 2016 (OM) {1}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.17116 of 2016 (OM)
Date of decision:28.04.2017
S.K.Kaushal … Petitioner
Vs.
The District Bar Association (DBA) Ambala and others
… Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
Present:- Petitioner-in-person.
Mrs. Kiran Bala Jain, Advocate
for respondent No.1.
Mr. Indresh Goel, Addl.A.G.Haryana.
AMIT RAWAL J.
The petitioner has approached this Court by seeking following
relief :-
“Civil Writ Petition under Article 226/227 read with Articles
14 and 300A of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a
writ in nature of certiorari to quash the impugned
order/notices of the respondent no.1, order no.5022/DBA dated
26.02.2016 (Annexure P-8), seize petitioner’s lawyer chamber
no.S104 and dismember him from the membership of the
District Bar Association, Ambala conveyed vide the respondent
no.1 application dated 15.03.2016 (Annexure P-12) under
Order 7 Rule 11 CPC without show cause, without the
authority of law, against the rule of audi-al-tram partam
without jurisdiction.
1 of 5
06-05-2017 07:54:47 :::
CWP No.17116 of 2016 (OM) {2}
AND
Against the auction of his seized chamber no.S104, vide
auction notice dated 4.8.2016 (Annexure P-16).
AND
Further praying for the issuances of appropriate directions
order or writ especially in the nature of mandamus directing
the respondents to restore petitioner’s membership and his
lawyer’s chamber and grant stay against the said auction on
23.8.2016 in the interest of justice.
AND
Any other writ, order or direction to which this Hon’ble Court
may deem fit and appropriate under the law equality and good
conscious may please also be issued against the respondents,
in favour of the petitioner.”
on the premise that he being legal practitioner, bearing registration no.P-
304/1988 after having rendered 35 years of service in Army. It is conceded
case of the petitioner that on 19.12.2011, he had filed a civil suit for
mandatory injunction against respondent no.1- The District Bar
Association, Ambala seeking allotment of chamber on the ground floor on
the premise of his old age and other disabilities yet without issuing show-
cause-notice, the District Bar Association had sold the aforementioned
chamber in open auction. Many applications in the aforementioned pending
suit have been filed. Even the petitioner had earlier approached this Court
by filing a Civil Revision Petition bearing No.610 of 2012 seeking issuance
of direction to the trial Court for deciding his stay application and as well as
2 of 5
06-05-2017 07:54:47 :::
CWP No.17116 of 2016 (OM) {3}
for production of documents which was disposed of, vide order dated
25.02.2012 (Annexure P-1). The petitioner had paid District Bar
Association subscription upto 2016, vide receipt no.14520 dated 22.01.2016
(Annexure P-3). He was flabbergasted to receive a notice dated 26.02.2016
(Annexure P-8) vide which he was informed that the aforementioned
allotment was cancelled. The auction aforesaid was conducted later on.
Even respondents had moved an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of Code
of Civil Procedure, for rejection of the plaint which is stated to be pending
adjudication and thus, urges this Court for granting the aforementioned
relief.
This Court, vide order dated 18.03.2017 had allowed the civil
miscellaneous application moved by respondent No.1 for placing on record
the documents, Annexures R-1 to R-8.
Mrs. Kiran Bala Jain, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
respondent No.1 has drawn the attention of this Court to the contents of the
aforesaid application indicating of the fact that writ petition is not
maintainable on the premise that civil suit is already pending. Several
interim applications have been filed which were dismissed. The revision
petition against the aforementioned order has also been dismissed. The
application seeking stay of the auction has been dismissed, vide order dated
12.08.2016 which has never been challenged. The petitioner is in habit of
filing of frivolous litigation and had not even spared his brothers, sisters and
nephews. All the chambers have been occupied by the practicing lawyers
and not even a single chamber is lying vacant. Even wife of petitioner had
also lodged an FIR against her husband, vide FIR No.705 dated 30.07.2000
3 of 5
06-05-2017 07:54:47 :::
CWP No.17116 of 2016 (OM) {4}
under Sections 498A/323/506 IPC, at Police Station Ambala Cantt. and
thus, urges this Court for dismissal of the present writ petition.
I have heard petitioner-in-person, learned counsel for the
respondents and appraised the paper book.
It is conceded position on record that civil suit is pending. The
suit had been filed in the year 2001, whereas, chamber was allotted to the
petitioner on 15.06.2011. His membership had been cancelled on
26.02.2016 (Annexure P-8) and before that vide order dated 01.02.2016
(Annexure P-4), he was issued a show-cause-notice, thus, argument of
petitioner-in-person for not complying with the principle of audi-al-tram
partam is totally fallacious. This Court called upon to Mr. V.K.Kaushal
with regard to maintainability of the writ petition against the District Bar
Association which is a Society registered under the Society Registration
Act, is not being a State falling within the ambit of Article 12 of the
Constitution of India but despite raising this question many time, Mr.
Kaushal had not been able to answer the same except by referring to the
questions of law framed in the writ petition which have been framed
according to the wisdom and comprehension of the petitioner. Once the
petitioner had already availed remedy, he can always seek interim relief
regarding stay of the auction as noticed above which has already been
rejected. He cannot indulge into forum shopping and continue with the
parallel proceedings by knocking the door of this Court under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India. The petitioner can always mould the relief in the
civil by seeking amendment of the same but the fact remains that the relief
as sought cannot be brought within the ambit of Article 226 of the
4 of 5
06-05-2017 07:54:47 :::
CWP No.17116 of 2016 (OM) {5}
Constitution of India.
No ground is made out for interference.
Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed.
(AMIT RAWAL)
JUDGE
April 28, 2017
savita
Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
5 of 5
06-05-2017 07:54:47 :::