Chandigarh, Dec 7: The Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association has argued before the high court that disciplinary measures taken against its members cannot be contested through writ petitions, pushing back against a plea filed by advocate Prithvi Raj Yadav who alleges he is being targeted for filing a PIL.
Yadav’s 2023 PIL on encroachment and illegal vending on court premises led to a UT administration crackdown that was later paused on the Bar’s request. The proceedings also revealed that the Bar had been running an illegal paid parking on UT land, which the court ordered to be stopped.
Earlier this year, Yadav told the court the disciplinary action was retaliation for the PIL. The bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry had stayed proceedings, remarking that such action “virtually amounts to interference” with the justice process.
In its reply, association secretary Gagandeep Jammu said the Bar is a private society with no state funding or government control, and its internal affairs are “not amenable to judicial review under Article 226.”
The Bar argued that treating it as a state body for writ purposes would open the floodgates for members from dozens of district and tehsil Bars to bring personal disputes to court. It also said Yadav’s application was premature because he had not challenged the 2023 executive decision authorising proceedings, and only sought a restraint on action.
The court will review submissions from both sides later this month.
