Meghalaya High Court
Date Of Decision : 13.03.2025 vs Union Of India on 13 March, 2025
Author: H.S.Thangkhiew
Bench: H.S.Thangkhiew
2025:MLHC:169
Serial No.04
Supp. List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
WP(C). No. 246 of 2024
Date of Decision : 13.03.2025
Shri. Tushar Chanda
...Petitioner
-Versus-
1. Union of India
Ministry of Law & Justice
represented by its Secretary,
New Delhi.
2. Bar Council of India 21 Rose Avenue,
INST Area, New Delhi
represented by its Secretary.
3. Bar Council of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam,
Mizoram & Nagaland, Guwahati High Court
Complex, M.G.Road, Guwahati,
represented by its Secretary.
4. Bar Council of Meghalaya represented by
its Chairman in the premises of the
Meghalaya High Court Bar Association,
M.G.Road, Shillong.
...Respondents
1
2025:MLHC:169
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice H.S.Thangkhiew, Judge
Appearance:
For the Petitioner/Applicant(s) : Mr. S.Charkrawarty, Sr. Adv. with
Mr. E.Laloo, Adv.
For the Respondent(s) : None for R 1 & 2.
Mr. B.Pathak, Adv. for R 3
Mr. G.Syngkrem, Adv.for R 4.
i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No
Law journals etc:
ii) Whether approved for publication Yes/No
in press:
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)
1. This instant writ petition had been instituted by the petitioner due to
the inaction of the respondent No. 2 in transferring the name of the writ
petitioner to the roll of the Bar Council of Meghalaya. In the course of the
proceedings, the petition’s grievances have since been redressed and the
transfer as far as he is concerned, has been affected.
2. However, Mr. S.Chakrawarty, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr.
E.Laloo, learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that this
problem is not confined to the writ petitioner alone, but concerns a large
number of advocates numbering 287 from the State of Meghalaya whose
2
2025:MLHC:169
transfers are yet to be effected by the Bar Council of India or Bar Council
of Assam etc. He submits that as the issue is of grave importance to all the
advocates practicing within the jurisdiction of Meghalaya that the scope of
this writ be enlarged and directions be issued to the respondents No. 2 and
3 to expedite the process.
3. Mr. K.S.Kynjing, who is the Chairman of the Meghalaya Bar
Council is present in Court today and has also voiced his concern in this
regard.
4. This Court having considered the submissions of the learned
counsel for the parties which is for the benefit of the members, and on
perusing the affidavit of the respondent No. 4 Meghalaya State Bar
Council has noted that at Annexure-1 of the said affidavit, a
communication dated 23-09-2017, from the respondent No. 2 addressed to
the respondent No. 4 has enclosed the names of the advocates who have
opted for transfer, but the same is yet to be effected.
5. On these facts and circumstances, this Court deems the instant case
to be a fit case to expand the scope of this writ petition, and accordingly
directs the respondent No.2 as far as the list dated 23-09-2017 is
concerned, and also the respondent No. 3 for any other names that might
have escaped, to expedite the process of transfer in order that the advocates
3
2025:MLHC:169
practicing within the jurisdiction of the State of Meghalaya not suffer. As
the order has been passed in the absence of the respondent No. 2, let a
copy of this order be supplied by the registry. It is expected that the
process be completed expeditiously preferably within a period of six
months from the date of this order.
6. With the above directions, matter stands closed and disposed of.
Judge
Signature Not Verified 4
Digitally signed by
SAMANTHA ANNA LIYA
RYNJAH
Date: 2025.03.13 17:08:19 IST
