Impugned order passed without hearing petitioner quashed; Special Committee directed to conduct fresh hearing and pass reasoned order within 15 days
In a significant judgment delivered on September 3, 2026, the Madhya Pradesh High Court (Division Bench, Jabalpur) quashed an order of the State Bar Council's Special Committee directing a recount of votes for the post of President of the District Advocates Association, Sagar. The court held that the impugned order, passed without affording the petitioner, advocate Ankleshwar Dubey, an opportunity of hearing, violated fundamental principles of natural justice and was therefore liable to be set aside.
The petitioner had challenged the Special Committee's order dated August 25, 2026, which had allowed a recount of votes following allegations of irregularities during the election held on August 22, 2026. The election saw 1350 votes cast, but the Returning Officer discovered 1355 ballot papers, leading to suspicion of malpractice. Initially, the Returning Officer ordered a recount, but due to interference by a mob and ensuing pressure, he revoked this order. Subsequently, respondent No. 3 appealed before the Special Committee, which reinstated the recount directive without hearing the petitioner.
Senior Advocate Vivek Tankha, representing the petitioner, contended that passing an order affecting the election outcome without hearing the affected party was arbitrary and illegal. He argued that the State Bar Council lacked jurisdiction to interfere in the District Bar Association's election procedure beyond the model bylaws issued by the Council.
The court, while hearing the matter, underscored the importance of adhering to natural justice and fairness in election disputes. Noting the absence of any opportunity given to the petitioner to present his case before the Special Committee, the bench-comprising Mr. Anand Pathak and B.P. Sharma, JJ.-set aside the impugned order. The court directed the Special Committee to rehear the matter, allowing all concerned parties, including the petitioner and respondents, to be heard fully and to pass a reasoned and legally sustainable order.
Further, the court mandated that the election results shall not be declared until the fresh adjudication is completed. It instructed the Returning Officer to secure all ballot papers and election materials safely and directed the Special Committee to dispose of the matter expeditiously, preferably within 15 days from the date of the order.
This judgment reaffirms the judiciary's commitment to upholding the principles of natural justice in professional body elections and ensures that election results are not affected by procedural irregularities or denial of fair hearing.
Bottom Line:
An order affecting election results passed without granting an opportunity of hearing to the concerned party is contrary to the principles of natural justice and liable to be set aside. The matter can be remanded for reconsideration with proper opportunity of hearing.
Statutory provision(s):
Article 226 of the Constitution of India
