CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 9336 OF 2008 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
DATE OF DECISION: July 09, 2009.
Parties Name
Rajesh Poonia
...PETITIONER
VERSUS
State of Haryana and others
...RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH
PRESENT: Mr. D.K.Jangra, with Mr. Raj Mohan Singh,
Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. R.S.Tacoria, Advocate, with
with Mr. Surender Lamba, Advocate,
for respondent No. 3.
JASBIR SINGH, J. (oral)
ORDER:
This order will dispose of four Civil Writ Petitions bearing No.
9336, 9522, 10098 and 10398 , all of the year 2008, as common question of
law and facts is involved in all these cases. For facility of dictating order,
facts are being taken from CWP No. 9336 of 2008.
Petitioner is an Advocate. It is his case that he is permanently
practicing at Charkhi Dadri. 143 Chambers, for the lawyers have been
constructed at above said place. Allotment of those chambers is in dispute.
Petitioner prays that list of the allottees (Annexure P-1) be
quashed. It is his allegation that the Chambers have been allotted without
formulating any rational criteria. The Advocates / individuals, who are not
eligible, have been allotted chambers, whereas rightful claim of the
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 9336 OF 2008 -2-
petitioners was rejected without any jurisdiction.
It is not in dispute that the applicants are more than the number
of built up chambers.
Such like situation can be remedied by making allotment under
some rational criteria. During pendency of this writ petition, vide order in
Civil Writ Petition No. 6265 of 2008, report was sought from the District
and Sessions Judge, Bhiwani, regarding allotment of plots. His report dated
July 24, 2008, is on record. The District Judge had indicated several
deficiencies in preparing the list of allottees. Taking note of that fact, the
authorities were directed to formulate criteria to allot the chambers. Today,
in Court, a resolution, passed by the Bar Association, showing criteria to
allot chambers along with a list of members, who were allotted chambers,
has been put on record. The relevant portion of the resolution reads as
under:-
“1. Members who are enrolled in Bar Association, Charkhi
Dadri will be treated as a practicing Advocate. They will be
eligible for the allotment of Chambers as per the clause of
agreement.
2. Subject to the following exceptions
a) Advocates who are enrolled at Bar Association, Charkhi
Dadri but they had got allotted chambers at Bhiwani Bar
Association and any other place in India will not be eligible
for chambers at Charkhi Dadri as per the clause Nos. 11 and
15 of agreement deed dated 14.2.2006 with the State of
Haryana.
b) Advocates, who are already registered at Bhiwani or any
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 9336 OF 2008 -3-other place by subsequently they got registered in Bar
Association, Charkhi Dadri and deposited first and second
instalments will not be eligible for the chambers because it is
apparent that they are not appearing at Charkhi Dadri and they
got enrolled simply to take benefit for allotment of chambers.
2. It is further resolved unanimously that Advocates who are
registered at Bar Association Charkhi Dadri and applied for
the chambers and paid their first instalment will be
considered and not falling in the above exceptions will also
be eligible for allotment of chambers.
3. It was further resolved that if any chamber remains
unallotted and becomes vacant then the applications will be
considered accordingly.
4. It was further resolved after discussion the previous
resolution and views of the Members in the today’s meeting
and accordingly following Members of Bar Association,
Charkhi Dadri are found eligible for allotment of chambers
143 at Bar Association, Charkhi Dadri.”
This Court feels that parameters to allot chambers are justified.
If any Member ( an Advocate) has been allotted a Chamber, at a different
place, for practice, he can reasonably be excluded from getting Chamber at
Charkhi Dadri.
Some of the petitioners have stated that they do not own any
Chamber at any other place in the State of Haryana. If that is so, liberty is
granted to them to raise their claim before the Deputy Commissioner, who
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 9336 OF 2008 -4-
will see that if their claim is justified, then they be also adjusted. This Court
is concerned with the harmony of the legal profession. Fight inter se the
Bar Members is not justified. It has been brought to the notice of this Court
that the Bar Association has already sent an application through the
Administrative Judge for allotment of land to construct additional
chambers.
In view of above, Registry is directed to put up that application
before the Building Committee of this Court on the next date of hearing so
that the State Government can be asked for allotment of more land for
construction of chambers. If application is not available, then the same be
invited from the Bar Association, Charkhi Dadri. The writ petitions stand
disposed of accordingly.
July 09, 2009. ( Jasbir Singh ) DKC Judge