SATYA PRAKASH RAVIDAS vs THE SECRETARY BAR COUNCIL OF DELHI & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~J * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment pronounced on: 02.02.2026 + W.P.(C) 10990/2025 SATYA PRAKASH RAVIDAS ..... Petitioner Through: Petitioner in person. versus THE SECRETARY BAR COUNCIL OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. T. Singhdev, Mr. Tanishq Srivastava, Mr. Abhijeet Chakravarty, Mr. Sourabh Kumar and Mr. Vedant Sood, Advocates for R-1/BCD. + W.P.(C) 13444/2025 SATYA PRAKASH RAVIDAS ..... Petitioner Through: Petitioner in person. versus THE SECRETARY BAR COUNCIL OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. T. Singhdev, Mr. Tanish Srivastava and Ms. Yamini Singh, Advocates for R-1/BCD. Mr. Jayant Bhushan, Sr. Advocate along with Mr. Anil Dutt, Mr. Yogit Mehra, Mr. Paras Choudhary, Mr. Amartya Bhushan, Ms. Lavi Agarwal, Advocates for Raj Vidya Kender. Mr. Ashish K. Dixit, CGSC along with Mr. Umar Hashmi, Mr. Harshit Chitransh and Ms. Iqra Sheikh, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ROHIT W.P.(C) 10990/2025 & W.P.(C) 13444/2025 Page 1 of 28 KUMAR PATEL Signing Date:03.02.2026 19:33:23 JUDGMENT 1. At the outset, it is noted that both petitions arise from overlapping causes of action and involve common issues. Accordingly, it is considered appropriate to hear and adjudicate both petitions together. 2. In W.P. (C) 10990 of 2025, the petitioner has prayed as under – “a) Issue a writ of 'quo warranto' calling upon Respondent No.2 to show under what authority she claims to represent Raj Vidya Kender in legal proceedings including CS (OS) 470/2019, despite the absence of a valid resolution or governing body authorization; b) Direct Respondent No.1, the Bar Council of Delhi, to initiate proceedings under 'Section 35 of the Advocates Act, 1961' against Respondent No.2 for professional mi