Vishal D. Remeteke Vs. State of MP & Ors.

Madhya Pradesh High Court (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)

WRIT PETITION, 18183 of 2021, Judgment Date: Oct 05, 2021

Law laid down - 

Advocates Act, 1961 – Section 6 and Sec.35 – Section 6 deals with ‘functions’ of State Bar Council which includes certain functions relating to determining/entertaining case of misconduct of an Advocate. The procedure to impose punishment is laid down in Sec.35 of the Act. An Advocate can be punished only as per legislative mandate ingrained in Sec.35 of the Act. Sec.6 does not provide any procedure to punish an Advocate. Procedure is laid down in Sec.35 of the Act to punish an Advocate.

Suspension of an Advocate – If State Bar Council has reason to believe that any Advocate is guilty of any professional or other mis-conduct, it shall refer the matter for disposal to its Disciplinary Committee. The Disciplinary Committee needs to put the concerned Advocate and Advocate General to notice, hear them and take a decision regarding punishment. In the instant case, the petitioner Advocate was not suspended by the decision of Disciplinary Committee. After suspending him, it is informed that Disciplinary Committee has taken up the matter which runs contrary to the statutory procedure prescribed in Sec.35. Hence, suspension order cannot be upheld.

Administrative law – Principles of natural justice – If statute empowers a particular authority/body to take a decision, that authority/body alone can take such decision and even higher body/authority cannot take such a decision unless there exists an enabling statutory provision for the same.

Interpretation of statute – (a) If statute requires a thing to be done in a particular manner it has to be done in the same manner and other methods cannot be accepted. (b) If language of statute is plain and unambiguous, it has to be given effect to irrespective of its consequences.

Vishal D. Remeteke Vs. State of MP & Ors.