1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:21.02.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR and THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH WA(MD)No.181 of 2011 and MP(MD)No.1 of 2011 B.Balakrishna Pillai :Petitioner/Appellant -Vs- 1.The Bar Council of India, Rep.by its Secretary, Rouse Avenue, Institution Area, Near Bal Bhavan, New Delhi 110 002. 2.The Bar Council of Tamil Nadu Rep.by its Secretary, High Court Campus, Chennai 600 104. :Respondents/Respondents Prayer:Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order dated 10.01.2011 passed by this Court in W.P.No.7936 of 2006. WP(MD)No.7936/2006:Writ Petition is filed under article 226 of the constitutionof India praying for a writ of declaration declaring that the removal proceedings No.12/2000 pending before the 1st respondent herein, has deemed to have been concluded in favour of the petitioner and consequently, not to give effect to the suspension order of the second respondent in ROC.No.1070/2001, dated 29.08.2001. For Appellant : Mr.S.S.Sundar For Respondents : Mrs.J.Nisha Banu JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR,J.) This Writ appeal is filed against the order of the learned Single Judge made in W.P.(MD)No.7936 of 2006, dated 10.01.2011. The appellant has prayed for a Writ of declaration, declaring that the removal proceedings bearing No.12/2000 pending before the 1st respondent has deemed to have been concluded in favour of the petitioner and consequently, not to give effect to the suspension order of the 2nd respondent dated 29.08.2001. 2.The learned Single Judge while dismissing the Writ petition, ultimately directed the 1st respondent to pass orders as expeditiously as possible, not later than 4 months and gave specific finding regarding the merits of the matter. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3.The grievance of the appellant now is that unless the order of the learned Single Judge in so far as deciding the merits of the matter is set aside, the rights of the appellant will be prejudiced and the 1st respondent will be forced to take a decision against the appellant. For the said limited point only, this Writ Appeal is filed and the appellant has also filed an affidavit to that effect on 15.02.2010, stating that this Writ Appeal may be disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to proceed against the appellant independently, uninfluenced by any of the findings or observations made in the final order passed in W.P.(MD)No.7936 of 2006 dated 10.01.2011 regarding the merits of the case. Since the 1st respondent is directed to decide the matter, the learned counsel for the appellant is justified in making such submission. 4.Recording the said submission, this Writ Appeal is disposed of, directing the 1st respondent to pass final order in accordance with law, without reference to the order passed by the learned Single Judge, within a period of 4 months from today. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P.is closed. Sd/- Deputy Registrar (LA) / TRUE COPY / Assistant Registrar To: 1.The Secretary, The Bar Council of India, Rouse Avenue Institution Area Near Bal Bhavan, New Delhi 110 002. 2.The Secretary, The Bar Council of Tamil Nadu, High Court Campus, Chennai 600 104. +1CC to Mr.S.S.Sundar, Advocate. SR.No.9710. Nbj RP/24.02.2011/2P/4C. W.A.(MD)No.181 of 2011 21.02.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/