Lawyers create commotion outside Chief Justice’ court, shout at SCBA President Parkeh for omission in arguments

Supreme Court lawyers created a ruckus outside the Chief Justice’s court in the Supreme Court, expressing their unhappiness at the arguments advanced by the President of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) PH Parekh. This was part of the larger drama that unfolded inside the court as the SCBA sought to defer the implementation of the new Supreme Court Rules, 2013 (Rules) by filing a writ petition..In the petition, the SCBA has prayed for a direction to the Supreme Court to “have an effective and meaningful consultation” with the SCBA on the Rules and to suspend the implementation of the Rules till the case is finally decided by the Supreme Court..When the SCBA President PH Parekh mentioned the matter at 2 pm before the Chief Justice’s Bench, Chief Justice Lodha and Justices Rohinton Nariman and Kurian Joseph proceeded to bombard Parekh with questions and remarks..When Parekh said that the main objection of the SCBA to the Rules was with respect to the increase in court fees, Justice Lodha retorted:.“We have raised the lawyers’ fees as well. To that you have no objection. There is a race between your Association and the Supreme Court AoR Association or what? They have also given us a representation with regard to the Rules. You have straightaway filed a writ petition. Is it not premature?”.Parekh proceeded to say that there was no consultation with the Bar: .“Parliament has by way of Article 145 delegated to the Supreme Court the power to make rules with regard to the procedure and functioning of the Supreme Court. Before sending the Rules to the President, it would have been better if the draft rules were given to us.” .“Bar and Bench are integral part of the judiciary and we always involve the Bar in whatever we do”, replied Justice Lodha. The Court then asked Parekh to raise the Constitutional or legal issue involved to which Parekh replied that he was not raising any Constitutional or legal issue now and his primary concern was with respect to the increase in court fees..Justice Nariman then butted in and remarked:.“Was there a consultation with the Bar in 1966 when the 1966 Rules were framed? If not, there is a serious Constitutional issue of ‘consultation with the Bar being implicit in Article 145’ which is yet to be decided.”.The Bench, inclined towards testing the new Rules for a brief period, did not issue any direction to postpone the implementation of the Rules..“You are essentially asking the Supreme Court to issue a direction to me”, said Justice Lodha in a lighter mood. He then issued a direction to transfer the matter to another Bench..The mentioning lasted forty five minutes. However, things were not quite over. A group of lawyers who were present in the court room said that their interests were not considered by the SCBA and that they have requested Senior Advocate Ram Jethmalani to represent them in the matter. “Are they not represented by your Association?”, a surprised Justice Lodha queried Parekh..As Parekh came out of the courtroom, lawyers surrounded him and shouted at him animatedly saying that there was indeed a Constitutional question pertaining to Article 145 and that he should have raised that instead of harping on the increase in court fees..The commotion continued up to the SCBA canteen..The matter will now be heard by another Bench comprising Justices Anil R Dave and UU Lalit tomorrow. It is listed as item 58 in court room 4..Copy of the petition filed by SCBA is given below.