Court Orders Reversion of Smt. Geeta Shukla to LDC and Immediate Initiation of Proper Appointment Process
In a landmark judgment delivered by the Madhya Pradesh High Court on December 19, 2025, the appointments of Smt. Geeta Shukla as Assistant Secretary and subsequently as Secretary of the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh have been declared invalid. The Division Bench consisting of Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf ruled that these appointments violated prescribed rules under the Advocates Act, 1961, the Madhya Pradesh State Bar Council Rules, and the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh Employees Service Rules.
The case, brought forth by petitioners including elected members of the State Bar Council, contested the promotions granted to Smt. Geeta Shukla, alleging procedural improprieties and lack of requisite qualifications. The court agreed with the petitioners, noting the absence of necessary recommendations from the Executive Committee and Smt. Shukla's lack of qualifications for the role of Secretary.
Key to the judgment was the court's analysis of the State Bar Council's appointment process, which bypassed several mandatory rules and qualifications. Smt. Shukla, originally appointed as a Lower Divisional Clerk (LDC), was promoted to Assistant Secretary without undergoing any suitability test or fulfilling the eligibility criteria. Subsequently, she was appointed Secretary without the prescribed qualifications, including a law degree and five years of advocacy experience.
The court emphasized the importance of adhering to established procedures for appointments within statutory bodies like the State Bar Council. It criticized the State Bar Council for failing to initiate a proper recruitment process for crucial positions, thereby compromising the integrity of the council's administrative functions.
In its judgment, the court quashed the appointments of Smt. Geeta Shukla to both Assistant Secretary and Secretary, ordering her reversion to her original post of LDC. Furthermore, the court directed the State Bar Council to immediately commence the appointment process for the positions of Secretary and Assistant Secretary, following the prescribed rules and qualifications, and complete this process within two months.
The court also mandated the appointment of a qualified person as an Ad-hoc Secretary to manage the responsibilities of the Acting Secretary during the interim period. This move is aimed at ensuring the seamless functioning of the State Bar Council's statutory duties.
Legal experts have hailed the judgment as a significant reaffirmation of the principles of administrative law and the necessity for transparent and rule-based governance in statutory bodies. The judgment sets a precedent for other state bar councils to adhere strictly to statutory provisions in their appointment processes.
Bottom Line:
Appointment and promotion within the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh must strictly adhere to the rules prescribed under the Advocates Act, 1961, the Madhya Pradesh State Bar Council Rules, and the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh: Jabalpur-Employees Service Rules.
Statutory provision(s): Advocates Act, 1961 Sections 11 and 22; Madhya Pradesh State Bar Council Rules - Rule 22 and 23; State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh: Jabalpur-Employees Service Rules - Rules 7, 8, and 9
