# The responses should be in English, but if any response is in a language other than

- **Citation:** C.L. No. 20/IIIb-36/Admn
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 1995-05-09
- **Case number:** C.L. No. 20/IIIb-36/Admn
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/the-responses-should-be-in-english-but-if-any-response-is-in-a-language-other-163993
- **Pages:** 1

## Text

533
3.
The responses should be in English, but if any response is in a language other than
English, it shall be accompanied by a translation thereof in English.
(iv)
Intimation to the Chairman Bar Council, Uttar Pradesh, whenever
Advocates resort to boycott or strike.
C.L. No. 20/IIIb-36/Admn. 'G' dated May 9, 1995
I am directed to say that whenever the Advocates resort to boycott or strike the
same shall also be intimated to the Chairman, Uttar Pradesh, Bar Council immediately
under intimation to the High Court.
No. 32 /2006/Admin 'G': Dated: 7.8. 2006.
The Bar Council of India, New Delhi has apprised to the Court that at its meeting
held on 8th and 9th April, 2006 considered the mode of addressing Judges of the Supreme
Court, High Court and Subordinate Courts and passed Resolution No. 58/2006.
In this, regard, I am directed to send herewith a copy of letter no. STBC (Cir .)
No. 15/2006, dated 13.06.2006 as well as letter No. STBC (Cir.) No. 11/2006, dated
20.04.2006 containing resolution no. 58/2006 referred to above for your information and
to request you to kindly bring the contents of the letter as also Resolution No.5812006 to
the notice of all the Judicial Officers working in the Judgeship under your supervision and
control for their information.
C.L. No. 38/2006/Admn. ―G‖, dated 19.9.2006
In modification of the Court's earlier Circular Letter Mo. 20/2006, dated
29.05.2006, I am directed to say that in furtherance while passing orders dated
25.07.2006 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 12458 of 2006 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition
No. 12458 of 2006. Purushlottam Giri v. Deputy Director Consolidation and others, the
Hon'ble Court is of the view that to streamline the details about lawyers practicing in a
district and in case of any suspicion about the veracity of details about a lawyer, the
details will be docketed in a common register which is to be maintained at one place in a
district which will serve as a nodal/model register to serve the requirements in a district.
The Hon'ble Court has been pleased to pass the following directions in this respect:
1.
The register about details of lawyers practicing in district courts shall be
maintained at the end of the district Judge and the same shall be prepared
under the supervision and control of the District Judge or any Additional
District Judge so authorized by the District Judge.
2.
Each and every practicing Advocate shall furnish requisite details about
himself by means of an application duly signed by him and such details
would include residential address, police station, postal address and
telephone number etc. besides the authenticated copy of enrolment and the
undertaking that he has not made any application anywhere else for enlisting
his name in the register aforesaid except the district in which he has been
practicing.
3.
The District Judge shall maintain complete record on the basis of such
record submitted by the Advocates as postulated in the amendment made in
the relevant Rules.