Advocate appearing as litigant in person – Is not practicing his profession – Cannot be permitted to argue with his robes: Section 30: Advocates, 1961.

The petitioner in the writ petition is an Advocate and the writ petition has been designed as a Public Interest Litigation with a prayer to issue a writ of Declaration, declaring that the Direct Benefit Transfer Scheme for Liquefied Petroleum Gas announced by the Union of India is inconsistent with public law and constitutional requirements. When the case was posted for admission, the petitioner appeared in person with his robes. The petitioner was asked as to whether he being the petitioner in this writ petition would be entitled to argue with his robes. The petitioner insisted that he is an Advocate enrolled with the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and in terms of the Rules framed under the Advocates Act, in particular the Rules governing Advocates given in Appendix I of the Rules, is duty bound to wear Bands and Gown while appearing, failing which he would be contravening the statutory provisions and therefore, was entitled to represent the matter with his robes. On such insistence, this Court framed the following preliminary question for consideration:-

Whether an Advocate is entitled to argue in a PIL, with his robes, on the ground that he is appearing as an advocate, or is entitled to argue with his robes when he is a petitioner in person in a Public Interest Litigation.

The Hon’ble Court observed that the contention raised by the petitioner is thoroughly misconceived. In the present case, the petitioner is appearing before the Court not as an Advocate of an any party, but on behalf of himself as he is the sole writ petitioner in the writ petition. Though the prayer in the writ petition is designed as a Public Interest Litigation, it is the specific case of the petitioner that he is also aggrieved and like him there are several others and therefore, he has filed this writ petition. If such is the case, we have no hesitation in holding that the petitioner himself is the litigant and he shall not be entitled to any rights and privileges as an Advocate while appearing in person for his own cause.

The Court further observed that a person cannot appear or plead before a Court of law in dual capacity, one as party and other as an Advocate and if an Advocate is appearing as party-in-person, he should in order to maintain the norms and decorum of the legal profession, appear before the Court of law as party in person putting off the band and robes prescribed for legal practitioner.

The Petitioner pleading his own cause though under the guise of a Public Interest Litigation, cannot seek recourse to any of the provisions of the Advocates Act, more particularly section 30 of the Act, inasmuch as no question has arisen as regards the right of the petitioner under the provisions of the Advocates Act and no rights conferred on him under the Act has been denied to him, while he is appearing in person. The word “practise” connotes exercise of a profession and when the petitioner an Advocate is a litigant in person, he does not practise his profession and therefore, he is not entitled to argue his case with his robes.