# Tahsil Bar Association v. I.G. Registration Alld, & ors

- **Citation:** (1999) 1 ILRA 157
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 1999
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/tahsil-bar-association-v-i-g-registration-alld-ors-39077
- **Pages:** 3

## Text

1 All.] ALLAHABAD SERIES 157
there should or should not be such simulteneous proceedings would
then receive judicial consideration and the court will decide in the
given circumstances of a particular case as to whether the
disciplinary proceedings should have been stayed. Thus, reliance on
this decision also does not held thus learned counsel for the
petitioner.

11. In the facts and circumstances of the case as indicated before,
this writ petition succeeds and is hereby allowed. The impugned
order of suspension dated 20.04.1993 contained in annexure-1 to the
writ petition is quashed. However, this order will not prohbit the
respondents to pass appropriate order, if circumstances so warrant,
provided there are sufficient reasons and justifiction therefor and it is
so permitted in law.

25
25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
&,9,/ 6,'(
&,9,/ 6,'(
'$7(' $//$+$%$'
'$7(' $//$+$%$'
%()25(
%()25(
7+( +21·%/( %,12' .80$5 52< -
7+( +21·%/( %,12' .80$5 52< -
7+( +21·%/( 5. 6,1*+ -
7+( +21·%/( 5. 6,1*+ -
&LYLO 0LVF :ULW 3HWLWLRQ 1R RI
7HKVLO %DU $VVRFLDWLRQ 'HRULD DQRWKHU
«3HWLWLRQHU
9HUVXV
,* 5HJLVWUDWLRQ $OODKDEDG DQG RWKHUV
«5HVSRQGHQWV
&RXQVHO IRU WKH SHWLWLRQHU
 6UL -3 *XSWD
&RXQVHO IRU WKH UHVSRQGHQWV
 6&
83 'RFXPHQWV :ULWHUV OLFHQVLQJ 5XOHV 25XOH *2
GDWHG EHDULQJ 1R65 (OHYHQ LV YDOLG 3DUD
By the Court

The prayer of the petitioner is to quash G.O.dated 20.4.1990 issued
by the State Government in its Institutional Finance (Stamp and
Registration) Deparment,Lucknow bearing No.SR-758 /Eleven-90
sent by the Joint Secretary to the Inspector General Registraion.

1998
------
November,17
158 THE INDIAN LAW REPORTS [1999
2.Rule
6(2)
of
the
U.P.Documents

Writers
Licensing
Rules,1977,reads thus:-

"(2)Nothing in sub-rule (1) shall apply where the writer of such
document is one of the parties thereto or is a legal practitioner
engaged by the parties for drawing up the document."(Emphasis
supplied).

3.The impugned G.O.clarifies that under rule 6(2) of the
U.P.Document Wriers Licensing Rules 1977 lawyers have right to
prepare deeds only on behalf of their clients.

4.Having heard Sri J.P.Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Sri .S.K.Jaiswal,learned Standing counsel for the petitioner Standing
counsel appearing on behalf of the State, we do not find any
infirmity in this clarification of the Govt.

5.It goes without saying that if any counsel prepares a document
after having a written authority from his client, in that event Rule
6(2) of the Rules aforementioned permits preparation of such a
document and the Government never intended to curb any
restriction on such a professional right of the counsel throughout the
State.

6.Accordingly,it cannot be held that there is any real cause of action
for the Petitioner Association to agitate by filing this writ petition.

 7.This writ is dismissed with aforementioned observation.
1998
------
Tahsil Bar
Association
 Vs.
I.G.
Registration
Alld, & ors.
------
B.K.Roy, J.
R.K.Singh, J.
1 All.] ALLAHABAD SERIES 159
25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
&,9,/ 6,'(
&,9,/ 6,'(
'$
'$7(' $//$+$%$'
7(' $//$+$%$'
%()25(
%()25(
7+( +21·%/( %,12' .80$5 52< -
7+( +21·%/( %,12' .80$5 52< -
7+( +21·%/( 5. 6,1*+ -
7+( +21·%/( 5. 6,1*+ -
&LYLO 0LVF :ULW 3HWLWLRQ 1R RI
.ULVKQD 3DWL 1DWK 6KXNOD
«3HWLWLRQHU
9HUVXV
6WDWH RI 83 RWKHUV
«5HVSRQGHQWV
&RXQVHO IRU WKH SHWLWLRQHU
 6UL 63 6LQJK
 6UL 6DW\D 3UDNDVK 7HZDUL
&RXQVHO IRU WKH UHVSRQGHQWV
 6&
$UWLFOH RI WKH &RQVWLWXWLRQ2*RYW RUGHUV DEROLVKLQJ WKH VHHGV
VWRUH SXUFKDVH FHQWUH LQ UXUDO DUHDV RI SODLQ RQO\ DQG QRW LQ WKH KLOO
UHJLRQ DQG %XQGHONKDQG UHJLRQ FKDOOHQJHG RQ WKH JURXQG RI EHLQJ
GLVFULPLQDWRU\2+HOG LW LV QRW YLRODWLYH RI $UWLFOH D DQG
 RI WKH FRQVWLWXWLRQ DV ERWK UHJLRQV DUH QRW JHRJUDSKLFDOO\
VRFLDOO\ FXOWXUDOO\ RU HYHQ DJULFXOWXUHZLVH VLPLODUO\ VLWXDWHG
By the Court

The petitioner who is Gram Pradhan of Gaon Sabha Padari Khund,
District Maharajganj, has come up with a prayer to quash the various
orders passed by the Government as contained in Annexures-3 to 6
of the writ petition abolishing the Seed Store and Purchase Centres in
rural areas.

A perusal of the various orders passed by the Government shows that
the Government had given various reasons for adopting such a policy
decision though in some cases it has not altogether abolished those
centres.

Sri S.P.Singh, learned counsel appearing in support of this writ
petition, contended that the policy decision of the Government is
discriminatory in as much as such centres have been allowed to
remain in Hill areas and Bundelkhand Region and thus it is violative
of Articles 14, 39 (a),40 and 48 of the Constitution of India.
1998
------
November,18