Delhi High Court dismisses Ashok Arora’s appeal against order refusing to stay his removal from the post of Secretary, SCBA

Delhi High Court
India TV News

Synopsis: The division bench of Justices Rajiv Sahai Endlaw and Asha Menon said that they did not see any reason to intervene with the order of the Single Judge and therefore, the appeal was denied.

Ashok Arora’s appeal against an order refusing to stay his removal from the position of Secretary of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) was dismissed by the Delhi High Court today.

Ashok Arora
India Legal

The division bench of Justices Rajiv Sahai Endlaw and Asha Menon said that they did not see any reason to intervene with the order of the Single Judge and therefore, the appeal was denied.

In the suit preferred by Ashok Arora against his ouster, the Court dealt with Arora’s appeal against the order passed by the Single Judge Bench of Justice Mukta Gupta.

The Single Judge held that Arora had failed to make any prima facie argument for the grant of an injunction against his expulsion in his favour.

Following the call by Arora for an Emergent General Meeting to remove Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave from the role of President of the SCBA, the SCBA Executive Council immediately suspended Arora from the position of Secretary.

Arora argued before the Division Bench and even before the Single Judge previously that his dismissal was void ab initio, since it was in violation of Rule 35 of the SCBA Rules.

According to his plea, the power to suspend or expel a member rested with the SCBA General House, and the same had to be determined after a committee carried out an investigation into a complaint of misconduct.

On the other hand, SCBA had argued that Arora’s emphasis on Rule 35 had been misguided because it only discussed the question of the dismissal of a member.

In its order, the Single Judge agreed with the position of SCBA and ruled that no request for suspension/termination of the status/position of a member of SCBA as an office-bearer of its Association was made under Rule 35.

In his case, Arora tried to declare the SCBA resolution to be void ab initio, ultra vires of the SCBA rules and regulations and to be revoked and declared null and void as such.

The action also sought to pass a decree of permanent injunction for and against Arora and SCBA, thus prohibiting it and its office bearers and workers from interfering with the functioning of the petitioner (Arora) from carrying out his duties as duly elected secretary of SCBA for the remaining period for which he was elected.

The Court has obtained guidance from the BCI to ensure that its May 10 resolution is properly adopted by the SCBA in writing and in spirit.