Del. HC: Denying Seat to Candidate Due to Administrative Fault Would be Unjust  ||  All. HC: Not Mandatory for Passport Authority to Impound Passport of Accused Persons  ||  Raj. HC: In Absence of Statutory Rules, Denying Appt. on Basis of Minimum Height is Discriminatory  ||  MP HC: Party Required to Lay Factual Foundation for Getting Benefit of Section 65 of Evidence Act  ||  Ker. HC: Settlement of Cases Including Offence of Rape & POCSO Act Offences is Not Permissible  ||  Gujarat High Court: Wife Allowed to Become Guardian & Manager of Husband in Coma  ||  SC: Partition of Property Can’t be Done by Metes & Bounds in Chandigarh  ||  SC Approves Requirement for Judicial Officers to be Converse With Local Language  ||  Kerala High Court: Denial of Ordinary Leave Reduces Convict’s Chances of Rehabilitation  ||  Delhi HC Issues Circular Regarding Pass-Overs or Adjournments in Bail, Parole Matters    

Madras HC to Suo Motu Test Constitutional Validity of Section 36B of Advocates Act, 1961 - (02 Mar 2020)

CONSTITUTION

Madras High Court has decided to suo moto consider the validity of Section 36B of the Advocates Act, 1961, in as much as it stipulates that in case a Disciplinary inquiry against an Advocate is not completed by the State Bar Council within stipulated time, the same shall stand transferred to the Bar Council of India.

Tags : MADRAS HIGH COURT   CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF SECTION 36B OF THE ADVOCATES ACT  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved