Plea in Supreme Court to ban Legislators from Legal Practice

Judiciary Feb 08, 2018 Editor : Shreya Bansal 0 Shares

After a sub-committee of the Bar Council of India concluded in their reportthat the legislators are allowed to practice law. The same petitioner Ashwini Upadhyay on Wednesday moved Supreme Court challenging the permission on the grounds of conflict of interest and violation of BCI rules.

Also Read - Indira Jai Singh Suggests Enrolment of (Indian) Foreign Law Graduates Provisionally in Her Letter to Bar Council of India Chairperson

Mr. Upadhyay, a Supreme Court lawyer and Delhi BJP leader has said in his petition that the writ petition is being filed under Article 32 seeking ban on legislators from practicing as an Advocate (for the period they are Member of Parliament or State Assembly) in spirit of the BCI Rule 49 and Article 14 of the Constitution.

He further said that, according to BCI Rule 49: An advocate shall not be a full-time salaried employee of any person, government, firm, corporation or concern, so long as he continues to practice and shall, o taking any such employment, intimate the fact to the BCI and shall cease to practice as an advocate, so long he is in such employment.

Also Read - BCI Chairman Calls Outrage over CJI’s Remarks on Rape Cases, “Hue & Cry” as not all those comments result in Orders

Upadhyay claimed that he had submitted a detailed representation to the Bar Council of India seeking a ban on legislators from practicing law but it has not taken appropriate steps to ban them till date.

Collegium Recommendations Pending with the Center for Over 6 Months Will Be Decided Within 3 Months, AG Tells Supreme Court

Collegium Recommendations Pending with the Center for Over 6 Moths Will Be Decided Within 3 Months, AG Tells Supreme Court

Legal Insiders Apr 16, 2021 Athira Nair ( Editor: Ekta Joshi ) 4 Shares

In line with the latest announcement by the the Attorney General, the Center will decide the collegium recommendations made by the Supreme Court within three months. They have been pending with the ministry for over 6 months.The bench that comprised of Chief Justice of India SA Bobde, Justice Kishan Kaul and Surya Kant, have recorded this submission made by the AG.“This case would be brought to a reasonable conclusion if the center tells us the timeline it will be sticking to at every...

Read full post

Entries in the balance sheet of the corporate debtor sufficient acknowledgement for the purpose of Section 18 of the Limitation Act: SC [READ JUDGMENT]

Limitation Act Supreme Court balance sheet

Judiciary Apr 16, 2021 Mathews Savio ( Editor: Ekta Joshi ) 3 Shares

The Supreme Court in its judgement in Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited v. Bishal Jaiswal & Anr. (CIVIL APPEAL NO.323 OF 2021) clarified the question of law and held that entries in the balance sheet can be taken as an acknowledgement of outstanding debt for the purpose of Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The judgement came from a bench comprising of Justice Rohinton Nariman, BR Gavai and Hrishikesh Roy.Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963 extends the period of...

Read full post