An advocate is barred from appearing in the industrial dispute case before the labour court or conciliation officer as provided in Section 36 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. After the amendment in the Advocates Act, can an advocate now appear before the labour court or conciliation officer?
From India, Lucknow
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
1From India, Lucknow
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Neeta Mathur,
The right to practice law is not absolute; the restriction imposed by Section 36(4) of the ID Act is not violative of the Advocates Act or Article 19(1)(g). The Allahabad HC stated that no lawyer has the right to appear in a particular case, and debarring a lawyer from one case does not infringe his right to practice, the Court said. The Allahabad High Court has held that Section 36(3) and (4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, which disentitles a party to be represented by an Advocate unless with the consent of the opposite parties and leave of the Labour court, is not violative of Section 29/30 of the Advocates Act read with Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.
Reference: [Right to Practise Law is not absolute; Allahabad HC](http://www.livelaw.in/right-to-practise-law-is-not-absolute-restriction-imposed-by-section-364-of-id-act-is-not-violative-of-advocates-actarticle-191g-allahabad-hc/)
Thank you.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The right to practice law is not absolute; the restriction imposed by Section 36(4) of the ID Act is not violative of the Advocates Act or Article 19(1)(g). The Allahabad HC stated that no lawyer has the right to appear in a particular case, and debarring a lawyer from one case does not infringe his right to practice, the Court said. The Allahabad High Court has held that Section 36(3) and (4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, which disentitles a party to be represented by an Advocate unless with the consent of the opposite parties and leave of the Labour court, is not violative of Section 29/30 of the Advocates Act read with Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.
Reference: [Right to Practise Law is not absolute; Allahabad HC](http://www.livelaw.in/right-to-practise-law-is-not-absolute-restriction-imposed-by-section-364-of-id-act-is-not-violative-of-advocates-actarticle-191g-allahabad-hc/)
Thank you.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Engage with peers to discuss and resolve work and business challenges collaboratively - share and document your knowledge. Our AI-powered platform, features real-time fact-checking, peer reviews, and an extensive historical knowledge base. - Join & Be Part Of Our Community.
4 CONSULTANT,ADVO CATE,ADVISORS, HR.doc