•  •  Dark Mode

Your Interests & Preferences

I am a...

law firm lawyer
in-house company lawyer
litigation lawyer
law student
aspiring student

Website Look & Feel

 •  •  Dark Mode
Blog Layout

Save preferences

Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry

16 February 2018

The Madras high court remarked that the legal profession was in "worst condition” as advocates who were not even secondary school graduates were contesting elections with the alleged support of retired judges and bureaucrats, reported Scroll and others.

22 June 2016

The Bar Council of India (BCI) asked the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry to identify lawyers in the state boycotting courts to protest the proposed disciplinary amendments to Advocates Act rules, and to submit a list of such lawyers to the BCI by today, reported the PTI.

11 January 2016

The Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry’s disciplinary committee refused to revoke or stay its order suspending 10 lawyers for professional misconduct, citing lack of jurisdiction, reported the Business Standard.

The committee comprising of chairman R Arunachalam and members K K S Ramachandran and R Ajay Kumar commented that the remedy for the lawyers is to approach Bar Council of India and that “the duty cast on the disciplinary committee is to inquire and dispose of only the suo motu complaint initiated as per the resolutions passed by the Bar council”

The state bar council has to date suspended at least 45 lawyers for alleged professional misconduct. 35 out of these were suspended by November 2015.

The present batch of 10 suspended lawyers submitted in their petition that the continued suspension is adversely affecting their practice and requested stay of prohibitory orders which have been in force for almost two months now.

27 October 2015

Disciplinary proceedings set to begin today against 14 lawyers who were suspended by the Bar Council of India for creating disorder in Madras high court, have been stalled by the Madras high court, reported the Business Standard.

A bench of justices R Sudhakar and VM Velumani restrained the Special Disciplinary Committee (SDC) formed by the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry (BCTP) to hold an inquiry against the suspended lawyers who had allegedly stormed various courtrooms and shouted slogans against judges, as was reported by Legally India.

The bench was hearing advocate and petitioner-in-person M Mohammed Rafi’s plea seeking to move the displinary proceedings to Karnataka State Bar Council’s committee, as originally proposed by the BCI Rafi has alleged that initially, the BCI constituted a disciplinary committee consisting of members from the Karnataka Bar Council so that a fair and proper inquiry could be conducted. But following a “sly” request from the BCTP, the inquiry was transferred to it.

The petitioner claimed that the suspended lawyers have good relationship with the members of BCTP nominated by BCI to inquire against them, making the whole process a hogwash. The petitioner had reportedly made a representation to the BCI to transfer the inquiry to another state on 29 September citing open support to errant lawyers by lawyers of the BCPT, which was rejected.

The court has directed the Secretary of the BCTP, who constituted the disciplinary committee, the Chairman of the BCI and the SDC to give their views on the plea in Rafi’s petition.

11 September 2013

Madras HC: Admit noneAround 1200 Tamil Nadu advocates await enrolment with the state bar council (SBC) which has not issued any enrolment certificates in four months.