The Allahabad High Court has left the Bareilly Bar Affiliation Dispute to the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh, which must now hear both rival lawyers’ associations and rule on the objections within two months. The High Court itself gave no ruling on the validity of the affiliation.
Prayagraj: Two months is the time the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh now has to decide the objections raised by the Advocate Bar Association, District Bareilly, against the affiliation granted to the Bareilly Bar Association, after giving both sides a full opportunity of hearing, the Allahabad High Court has directed [Advocate Bar Association District Bareilly And Another v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others].
A Division Bench of Justice Ajit Kumar and Justice Garima Prashad disposed of the writ petition filed by the Advocate Bar Association, District Bareilly and Advocate Gaurav Singh Rathore by its order dated October 28, 2026.
What the Bar Council told the Bench
Counsel for the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh, Ashok Kumar Tiwari, told the Bench that if the petitioners had filed objections, the Council would consider and decide them in accordance with law within two months, after giving a full hearing to the petitioners and to the office bearers of the Bareilly Bar Association.
Recording this, the Court disposed of the petition with the following direction:
“In view of above, this petition stands disposed of with direction to the Bar Council, Uttar Pradesh to dispose of objection filed by petitioners in accordance with law and giving opportunity of hearing to both the petitioners and respondent no. 4, as expeditiously as possible, within a period of two months of presentation of certified copy of this order.”
The High Court did not rule on the validity of the affiliation itself. The rival claims on documents, recognition and locus remain open for the Bar Council to decide.
What the petitioners wanted
The petitioners challenged the order of affiliation granted to the Bareilly Bar Association (respondent no. 4) by the Chairman of the UP Bar Council. Their case was that the Bareilly Bar Association had not supplied the documents required for a valid affiliation under the Model By-laws and the circular letters issued by the State Bar Council.
Senior Advocate R.K. Ojha, appearing for the petitioners, argued that affiliation had been granted merely on an assurance given on affidavit, without the requisite documents being placed on record.
He submitted that the Advocate Bar Association of District Bareilly is a validly recognised Bar Association, though he did not dispute that both the petitioner association and the Bareilly Bar Association are registered under the Societies Registration Act. He also told the Court that the petitioners had already filed objections before the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh and asked that they be directed to be decided in accordance with law.
The other side
Opposing the petition, Senior Advocate Prabhakar Awasthi, appearing for the Bareilly Bar Association, contended that it is one of the oldest bodies of advocates, registered under the Societies Registration Act since 1984, and a validly registered Bar Association.
He described the petitioner association as a breakaway group of lawyers that obtained registration with the Registrar of Societies only in 2026, after losing the lawyers’ election held by the Bareilly Bar Association. He argued that the petitioners had no locus to question the renewal of an affiliation that the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh had already granted earlier.
Why the order matters
The order reflects the High Court’s settled approach of leaving questions of recognition and affiliation of Bar Associations to the State Bar Council, the statutory body that regulates them, rather than deciding disputed facts about documents and registration in writ jurisdiction.
By fixing a two-month timeline and requiring a hearing for both rival bodies, the Court has ensured that the dispute between the two Bareilly lawyers’ associations is resolved on the merits by the Bar Council, in line with the principles of natural justice.
Case Title: Advocate Bar Association District Bareilly And Another v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others [WRIT – C No. 43831 of 2026]
Bench: Justice Ajit Kumar and Justice Garima Prashad, Allahabad High Court
Date of Order: October 28, 2026
Appearances: Senior Advocate R.K. Ojha with Dadhi Bal Yadav for the petitioners; Senior Advocate Prabhakar Awasthi with Kartikeya Agrawal for respondent no. 4; Ashok Kumar Tiwari for the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh