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