Law:

Section:

Legal Practitioners Act (XVIII of 1870), S. 36, Explanation Resolution of Bar Association declaring certain person as tout Sufficient evidence of general repute-Court's action upon such resolution-No interference by High Court.   A I R 1931 All. 315 and 56 Cal. 800 ref. JUDGMENT   This revisional application is directed against the order of the Additional District Magistrate of Comilla dated the 8th December 1960, passed against the present petitioner under section 36 of the Legal Practitioners Act. The learned Additional District Magistrate has declared the petitioner to be a tout and has directed his name to be included in the list of touts. This was done on receipt of a copy of a resolution of the Mukhtears Bar Association. The petitioner moved this Court and obtained the present Rule.   The first point that was raised in support of the Rule was ultimately not pressed inview of the production of the Notification No. CAL-230/60-889, dated the 22nd July 1960 by which the Additional District Magistrate was authorised to exercise all powers of a District Magistrate.   Mr. Huda attempted to argue that as there was nothing to show on the record that the Additional District Magistrate was authorised to exercise the powers of the- District Magistrate the order passed by him under section 36 of the Legal Practitioners Act was invalid. In view of the production of a copy of the notification he did not ultimately press this point. The main argument that has been advanced in this Rule before me is that there is no evidence on the record to show that the present petitioner is a tout. Subsection (2) of section 3 of the Legal Practitioners Act defines a tout as one who procures in con sideration of any remuneration moving from any legal practitioner, the employment of the legal practitioner in any legal business; or who proposes to any legal practitioner or to any person interested in any legal business to procure, in considera tion of any remuneration moving from either of them, the employment of the legal practitioner in such business. The impugned order has been passed under section 36 of the Legal Practitioners Act. It empowers every High Court,…