# Purusottam Giri v. D.D.C., Bulandshahr and others

- **Citation:** (2006) 2 ILRA 612
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2006-03-03
- **Case number:** Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.12458 of 2006
- **Bench:** S.N. Srivastava
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/purusottam-giri-v-d-d-c-bulandshahr-and-others-40618
- **Pages:** 5

## Headnote

High Court Rules, 1952-Chapter XXIVrule
2-A-Vakalatnama-in
absence
of
particular of full name, of counsel,
complete address of chamber/office and
residence-including Phone number, date
of sign and enrollment number general
mandamus issued-not to accept such
vakalatnama-necessary direction issued
to all the District Judges, Tribunal, Lower
Court
etc.
to
ensure
the
proper
implementation.

Held: Para 9, 10 & 11
Since in the instant case, the learned
counsel was asked to remove defect and
he
has
since
removed
the
defects
consistent with the mandate of Rule 2 A
of the Rules of the Court, I am
disinclined to proceed further in this
regard.
However,
in the
facts and
circumstances,
considering
that
the
Courts
are
deluged
with
Vakalatnamas/memos
of
appearance
incomplete in requisite details I feel
called to issue judicial flat directing
stamp
reporter
not
to
accept
Vakalatnama/memo of appearance in
any case unless they are complete in all
requisite details as embodied in Rule 2-A
of the Rules of Court.

In the above conspectus, it is hereby
mandated that the Stamp reporter of the
Court/Office
shall
scrutinize
the
Vakalatnama very closely and unless
they are complete in all requisite details
as embodied in Rule 2-A of the Rules of
the Court, he will not allow the petition
to be processed for being presented
before the Court.

In
my
considered
view
there
is
compelling need to amend the statutory
Rules pertaining to subordinate courts as
well
on
similar
lines.
Till
such
amendments
are
effected
in
the
statutory rules, it would be in the fitness
of things to circulate a copy of this
judgment to all the District Judges/all
the Chairmen of the Tribunals/Chief
Secretary, U.P. Shasan Lucknow for strict
compliance with the resolution of the Bar
Council of the State of U.P.. It may be
suggested that the District Judges and
all authorities concerned in State of U.P.
shall
maintain
a
register
docketing
complete details about the lawyers
practicing, which may be duly prepared
upon verification of original enrolment
certificates of an Advocate and whenever
any Vakalatnama is filed and in case of
any suspicion about the authenticity of
registration/enrolment number may be
processed for being presented before the
Courts/Tribunals etc.
Case law discussed:
2 All] Purusottam Giri V. D.D.C., Bulandshahr and others
613
AIR 1976 SC-242

## Text

612 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2006
the applicants are minor children within
the meaning of the Act, he shall proceed
to make an inquiry in accordance with
law and refer the matter to the Board or
act in accordance with Section 6 (2) of the
Act.

2. In the circumstances, this
application is allowed and the impugned
order dated 6.5.2005 is set aside. The
matter is sent back for a decision on
merit.

Application Allowed.
---------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 03.03.2006

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE S.N. SRIVASTAVA, J.

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.12458 of 2006

Purusottam Giri

...Petitioner
Versus
Deputy
Director
of
Consolidation,
Bulandshahr and others ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri V.S. Rajpoot
Sri H.M. Srivastava

Counsel for the Respondents:
Sri V.K. Singh
Sri S.P. Singh
S.C.

High Court Rules, 1952-Chapter XXIVrule
2-A-Vakalatnama-in
absence
of
particular of full name, of counsel,
complete address of chamber/office and
residence-including Phone number, date
of sign and enrollment number general
mandamus issued-not to accept such
vakalatnama-necessary direction issued
to all the District Judges, Tribunal, Lower
Court
etc.
to
ensure
the
proper
implementation.

Held: Para 9, 10 & 11
Since in the instant case, the learned
counsel was asked to remove defect and
he
has
since
removed
the
defects
consistent with the mandate of Rule 2 A
of the Rules of the Court, I am
disinclined to proceed further in this
regard.
However,
in the
facts and
circumstances,
considering
that
the
Courts
are
deluged
with
Vakalatnamas/memos
of
appearance
incomplete in requisite details I feel
called to issue judicial flat directing
stamp
reporter
not
to
accept
Vakalatnama/memo of appearance in
any case unless they are complete in all
requisite details as embodied in Rule 2-A
of the Rules of Court.

In the above conspectus, it is hereby
mandated that the Stamp reporter of the
Court/Office
shall
scrutinize
the
Vakalatnama very closely and unless
they are complete in all requisite details
as embodied in Rule 2-A of the Rules of
the Court, he will not allow the petition
to be processed for being presented
before the Court.

In
my
considered
view
there
is
compelling need to amend the statutory
Rules pertaining to subordinate courts as
well
on
similar
lines.
Till
such
amendments
are
effected
in
the
statutory rules, it would be in the fitness
of things to circulate a copy of this
judgment to all the District Judges/all
the Chairmen of the Tribunals/Chief
Secretary, U.P. Shasan Lucknow for strict
compliance with the resolution of the Bar
Council of the State of U.P.. It may be
suggested that the District Judges and
all authorities concerned in State of U.P.
shall
maintain
a
register
docketing
complete details about the lawyers
practicing, which may be duly prepared
upon verification of original enrolment
certificates of an Advocate and whenever
any Vakalatnama is filed and in case of
any suspicion about the authenticity of
registration/enrolment number may be
processed for being presented before the
Courts/Tribunals etc.
Case law discussed:
2 All] Purusottam Giri V. D.D.C., Bulandshahr and others
613
AIR 1976 SC-242

(Delivered by Hon'ble S.N. Srivastava, J.)

1. While hearing the above petition
on 28.2.2006, it surfaced to my notice that
power/Vakalatnama filed by the learned
counsel for the petitioner was wanting in
requisite/necessary details and hence
following order was passed directing the
learned counsel for the petitioner to make
good
the
shortcomings
in
the
power/vakalatnama and the case was
ordered to be posted up for today. The
order passed by the Court is quoted
below:-

"It was pointed out to learned
counsel
for
the
petitioner
that
Vakalatnama is not filled in accordance
with Bar Council Rules and amended
High Court Rules. He prays for and is
granted 24 hours time to make necessary
correction in the Vakalatnama.

Put up on 3.3.2006."

2. In connection with the above, it
may be noticed that the High Court Rules
were
appropriately
amended
vide
Notification No.450-VIII-C2 dated Sept
16, 2005 which was published in U.P.
Gazette (Part II) dated 11.6.2005 by
which new Rule 2 Add the Quick
Launcher on Panel was added after Rule 2
of Chapter XXIV of the Rules of Court
1952 in the following manner:-

"Rule 2-Add the Quick Launcher on
Panel: Vakalatnama or Memorandum of
Appearance to contain full name, address
etc.
of
the
counsel-
The
Stamp
Reporter/Office shall not accept any
Vakalatnama
or
memorandum
of
appearance unless it bears full name of
the counsel, his complete address both of
High Court, chamber/office, if any and
residence including telephone number (s)
if any, date of signing Vakalatnama
enrolment number etc."

Reverting to the defect in the
Vakalatnama, it was noticed by the Court
that the Vakalatnama filed in the case by
the learned counsel for the petitioner
neither contained full name of the counsel
nor other requisite details like the full
addresses of office/chamber, residence
including telephone number etc. The
Court feels constrained to say that in
majority of Vakalatnamas being fined in
the cases before this Court, requisite
details as contemplated in Rule 2-A
aforesaid of the Rules of the Court are
conspicuous by their absence and a result,
the learned counsels for the other side
often find it harrowing and difficult to
locate the learned counsel ostensibly for
the purposes of exchanging affidavits,
serving notice/counter affidavit etc. or
apprising
them
of
any
information
required by the Court to be given in
writing in the course of a proceeding
before the Court.

3. Besides amendment in the Rules
of the Court as aforesaid, Bar Council of
Uttar Pradesh passed a resolution on
10.12.1989 taking cognizance of the fact
that the courts are being tricked or misled
by
certain
unscrupulous
elements
impersonating themselves as lawyers
which in consequence has lowered the
status/dignity of the lawyers in the
estimation of the society, directing that
the lawyers appearing in a particular case
shall
invariably
disclose/mention
registration number/enrolment number. It
was further resolved in the resolution that
failure on the part of lawyers in
mentioning their registration/enrolment
614 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2006
number shall be treated as professional
misconduct. The resolution so passed is
excerpted below for ready reference.

izLrko

"izk;% ;g ns[kus dks fey jgk gS fd dqN O;fDr
vf/koDrk u gksrs gq, Hkh U;k;ky;ksa esa vf/koDrk cu dj
odkyr dk dk;Z dj jgs gSa vkSj okndkfj;ksa rFkk U;k;ky;ksa
dks /kks[kk ns jgs gSa ftlls vf/koDrk lekt dh xfjek Hkh
fxj jgh gSA ckj dkSafly ;g fu'p; djrh gS fd izR;sd
vf/koDrk vius odkyrukesa esa vFkok ipkZ ,MoksdsV esa
viuk uke Li"V :i ls fy[ksxk vkSj lkFk gh vf/koDrk
iathdj.k la[;k Hkh fy[ksxkA ;g Hkh fu'p; gqvk fd bl
izLrko dh izfrfyfi izR;sd tuin ,oa leLr U;k;kf/kdj.kksa
dks leqfpr dk;Zokgh gsrq izsf"kr dj nh tk;s"A

rnuqlkj vf/koDrkvksa ds vkpj.k lEcU/kh fu;e esa
fuEufyf[kr fu;e cuk;s tkrs gSa%&

"izR;sd vf/koDrk fdlh Hkh U;k;ky; esa viuk
odkyrukek ;k ipkZ eseks nkf[ky djrs le; viuh
iathdj.k la[;k Li"V
:i ls mlesa vafdr djsa vkSj ,slk u djuk O;olkf;d
nqjkpj.k ekuk tk;sxk"A

4. It would thus be clear that
resolution of the Bar council followed by
amendment in the Rules of the Court by
adding Section 2A concurrently envisage
that complete details including full name,
complete address of office and residence
including
phone
number,
enrolment
number have invariably to be disclosed.
Both the Rules of the Court and resolution
of the Bar council clearly postulate that
no Vakalatnama or memorandum of
appearance shall be accepted by courts or
tribunals functioning in State of U.P.
unless they are complete in all requisite
details as provided. In this connection
Section 35 of the Advocates Act may also
be referred to which defines misconduct
and speaks of disciplinary enquiry into the
allegations of professional or other
misconduct.

5. As stated supra, legal profession
is a noble profession and a legal
practitioner has been called an integral
part of the justice system and he is thus in
a sense a member of the body judicial. In
Bar Council of Maharasthra v. M.V.
Dabholkar (AIR 1976 SC 242, Iyer, J.
said that "the vital role of the lawyer
depends
upon
his
probity
and
professional
life-style.
The
central
function of the legal profession is to
promote the administration of justice. As
monopoly to legal profession has been
statutory granted by the nation, it
obligates
the
lawyer
to
observe
scrupulously those norms, which make
him worthy of confidence of community in
him as a vehicle of social justice". The
preamble to the Bar Council of India
Rules postulates that "An advocate shall,
at all times, comport himself in a manner
befitting his status as an officer of the
Court, a privileged member of the
community, and a gentleman, bearing in
the mind that what may be lawful and
moral for a person who is not a member
of the Bar, or for a member of the bar in
his non-professional capacity may still be
improper for an Advocate. Without
prejudice
to
the generality
of
the
foregoing obligations, an Advocate shall
fearlessly uphold the interests of his
client, and in his conduct conform to the
rules hereinafter mentioned both in letter
and spirit.

6. The Bar Council has, in the matter
of
practice
of
professions
of
law
mentioned in Section 30 of the Act,
subjected
the
Advocates
to
certain
restrictions. Section 1, Chapter II of the
Bar council of India Rules mentions duty
of an Advocate to the Court. Section II
Chapter II mentions duty of an Advocate
to the client and Section III mentions duty
2 All] Purusottam Giri V. D.D.C., Bulandshahr and others
615
of an Advocate to Opponent while
Section IV postulates duty to colleagues.
These duties have been envisaged with a
view to protecting the dignity of the legal
community
besides
upholding
the
confidence of general places in the
efficacy of law. In the event of any breach
by a member of legal profession, the Bar
Council is authorized with the power to
initiate disciplinary action/proceeding in
order to protect the dignity of the legal
profession. It is in this perspective,
considering that unscrupulous elements
posing themselves as lawyers are bringing
disrepute to the legal profession, the Bar
Council
appropriately
passed
the
resolution aforestated to put check on
counterfeit
lawyers.
Besides
the
mandatory requirement as contemplated
in the amended Rules of the Court, I find
myself in completed in the amended
Rules of the Court, I find myself in
complete agreement with the resolution
that though legal profession has been a
noble
profession
such
unscrupulous
elements have crept into this profession
and are bring disrepute to the profession.
One such case has forced itself upon the
notice of the Court in which Court was
compelled to refer the matter to the Chief
Judicial
Magistrate
Azamgarh
for
enquiry.

7. In writ petition no.43255 of 2001,
which this Court is seized of, the
disquieting feature noticed by the Court
was that the said petition was filed by a
person personating himself as Ram Kesh
petition. Subsequently, a person swearing
himself to be Ram Kesh appeared before
the Court through Sri P.C. Srivastava,
Advocate claiming himself to be Ram
Kesh and stated that he never filed the
aforesaid petition. Learned counsel who
filed the petition on behalf of the
petitioner on being asked to produce the
petitioner, made a statement across the
bar that despite his best efforts nobody
has responded. It would however appear
from a scrutiny of the Vakalatnama that
the aforesaid Ram Kesh has been
identified by one Lalta Yadav, who
according to the petitioner's counsel is an
Advocate though it is not disclosed as to
where the aforesaid Lalta Yadav has been
practicing. In the above perspective, the
Court was compelled to refer the matter to
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Azamgarh for
enquiry and report.

8. Reverting to Rules of the Court, it
is clearly postulated in Rule 2-Add the
Quick Launcher on Panel of the Rules of
Court that the Stamp reporter/office shall
not
accept
any
Vakalatnama
or
memorandum of appearance unless it
bears full name of the counsel, his
complete address both of High Court,
chamber/office if any and residence
including telephone number (s) if any,
date of signing Vakalatnama, enrolment
number etc.

9. Since in the instant case, the
learned counsel was asked to remove
defect and he has since removed the
defects consistent with the mandate of
Rule 2 A of the Rules of the Court, I am
disinclined to proceed further in this
regard. However, in the facts and
circumstances, considering that the Courts
are deluged with Vakalatnamas/memos of
appearance incomplete in requisite details
I feel called to issue judicial flat directing
stamp
reporter
not
to
accept
Vakalatnama/memo of appearance in any
case unless they are complete in all
requisite details as embodied in Rule 2-A
of the Rules of Court.
616 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2006

10. In the above conspectus, it is
hereby mandated that the Stamp reporter
of the Court/Office shall scrutinize the
Vakalatnama very closely and unless they
are complete in all requisite details as
embodied in Rule 2-A of the Rules of the
Court, he will not allow the petition to be
processed for being presented before the
Court.

11. Similar disquieting, situation
prevails in the subordinate courts where
according to the Bar Council Resolution
dated 10.12.1989, unscrupulous elements
can be seen to be playing tricks with the
Courts bringing disrepute to the judiciary
as well as to the dignity of the lawyers
community. In my considered view there
is compelling need to amend the statutory
Rules pertaining to subordinate courts as
well
on
similar
lines.
Till
such
amendments are effected in the statutory
rules, it would be in the fitness of things
to circulate a copy of this judgment to all
the District Judges/all the Chairmen of the
Tribunals/Chief Secretary, U.P. Shasan
Lucknow for strict compliance with the
resolution of the Bar Council of the State
of U.P.. It may be suggested that the
District
Judges
and
all
authorities
concerned in State of U.P. shall maintain
a register docketing complete details
about the lawyers practicing, which may
be duly prepared upon verification of
original enrolment certificates of an
Advocate and whenever any Vakalatnama
is filed and in case of any suspicion about
the authenticity of registration/enrolment
number may be processed for being
presented before the Courts/Tribunals etc.
It may be quipped here for edification that
so far as High Court is concerned Rules of
the Court have already been amended and
in pursuance thereof list of Advocates is
being processed.

12. Registrar General is directed to
ensure strict compliance with the above
directions henceforth. As stated supra, a
copy of this judgment be circulated to all
authorities including Chairmen of various
Tribunals functioning in the State of U.P.
and
Chief
Secretary,
U.P.
Shasan
Lucknow for onward transmission and
compliance
in
all
courts
including
Revenue as well as consolidation courts
within four months. The matter may be
listed on 7.7.2006 for monitoring the
compliance
with
the
directions
aforestated.
---------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 10.02.2006

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE R.K. RASTOGI, J.

Criminal Misc. Application no. 1591 of
2006

Manoj Kumar Swami

...Applicant
Versus
State of U.P.

...Opposite Party

Counsel for the Applicant:
Sri S.P. Singh Raghav
Sri Anil Raghav

Counsel for the Opposite Party:
A.G.A.
Code of Criminal Procedure-Section 482application to summon school record-by
defence counsel during Trial of offence
under Section 498-A/304 I.P.C.-on the
ground that in dying declaration the
deceased had made statement about her
illiteracy-actually she had passed High
School examination-Trail Court rejected
on the ground that the statement of the
deceased has been recorded in presence
of Magistrate-cannot be disbelievedheld-deceased has right to summon any
evidence to substantiate his defencerejection-held not-proper.