Chandigarh, Dec. 7 -- The Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association (PHHCBA) has opposed move of a lawyer approaching high court on judicial side, disciplinary proceedings against him, in a public interest litigation (PIL) by him, which led to major embarrassment to the Bar body. The Bar body in response to an application filed by the lawyer, challenging disciplinary proceedings, has said that cause of PIL is completely different and the lawyer can't be allowed to rake up his "personal issues/ grievance in the PIL". It was in 2023, the lawyer, Prithvi Raj Yadav had filed a PIL highlighting issue of encroachment and illegal vending at high court premises. Following PIL, the UT administration launched a crackdown, which was stayed by the high court on the request from the Bar body. It was also during this PIL that it came to light that Bar body has established an illegal parking on a green belt and making collection of parking fee on the area belonging to UT administration. The same was stopped upon high court intervention. Yadav, earlier this year had told the court that disciplinary proceedings were result of his PIL and he was being pressured to take back the PIL. High court had stayed the proceedings acting on the application from him. " ..Where is the misconduct. This (disciplinary action) is interference in the process of justice This virtually amounts to interference)," the bench of chief justice Sheel Nagu and justice Sanjiv Berry had observed while dealing with the application filed by the lawyer in September seeking court's indulgence and alleging that these proceedings were result of the PIL. In the response submitted by Gagandeep Jammu, secretary of the Bar association, the Bar body said, "even otherwise a dispute between a Bar member and association cannot be questioned in a writ jurisdiction as the association is registered under the Societies Registration Act, as private society/Association and is not taking any aid from the state/government," the response says adding that there is no "deep control" of the government or even the Bar Council on the Bar association. If assumed, it is a state within writ jurisdiction of high court even then his application challenging disciplinary proceedings can't be entertained. It will spell chaos as there are 43 district Bars in two states and UT and separate Bars in sub divisions and tehsils, etc. If the prayer of petitioner is accepted any dispute whatsoever between Bar body and any members would reach before the court, the Bar body said. "Any of the internal affairs of the Bar association, which is a private body, are hence not amenable to any kind of judicial review, including but not limited to Article 226 of the Constitution of India," The Bar body said. It also termed his application premature and that he has not challenged executive body decision of July 2023, whereby decision was taken for proceedings against him. He has only sought restrain order against taking any action against him, the Bar body said adding that proceedings pursuant to this decision are still pending. Court will consider Bar body's response and lawyer's contentions later this month....