Allahabad High Court disapproves bar body's request to not pass adverse orders

The Allahabad High Court on Thursday expressed its displeasure over a letter circulated by the High Court Bar Association (HCBA) requesting the Court to not pass any "adverse orders" in the absence of lawyers who were abstaining from work [Hazi Tahseen Khan v. Gandhi Mohan Saxena And Another]..A Bench of Justice Ajit Kumar expressed anguish over such a request to put court proceedings on hold, particularly since the HCBA's representative could not confirm that there was any general resolution supporting such a move. The judge opined that a letter written by any Bar Association official, at the instance of a few lawyers cannot be considered as the "general view" of the Bar."It is unfortunate that constitution law Court's functioning is put on hold without considering importance of public time and public money, besides object to ensure speedy justice delivery system. A Bar Association should understand that Courts working is governed under the rules of the Court and vacations/holidays are already scheduled and except for compelling and unavoidable circumstances, like natural calamities, pandemic etc.," the Court added..The Court also made it clear that in future, such 'no adverse order' requests should always be supported by resolutions adopted by the Bar Association."The convenience of Bar Association in any pressing or any unavoidable circumstances are always respected so as to entertain request for no adverse orders, but for that Bar Association or its Executive Body is expected to pass resolution ... It is expected that in future whenever Bar Association wants such letters to be circulated to the benches of the High Court seeking no adverse orders, it is always supported by resolution to be adopted by the Bar Association in general and in exceptional circumstances by its Executive Body, the Court said in the November 7 order..The Court emphasized that its functioning should generally not be affected due to the absence of some advocates, even more so when their inability to attend court is due to personal reasons, such as religious rituals.In such cases, lawyers should make individual requests for adjournment, which the Court usually accepts, the judge added."But for untoward incidents when Advocates may not attend the Court, entire Courts working should not be generally affected and that too for certain number of Advocates not able to attend the Court for their personal religious rituals to be performed at home. In such a situation individual request for adjournment should be made and in such a case Court may certainly entertain such requests for adjournment," the Court said..The Court made the observation after it was requested to adjourn a hearing that was fixed on November 7. It noted that the counsel for the respondents had failed to appear, after having remained absent in the last hearing as well. The petitioner's counsel, on the other hand, had insisted that the matter be heard urgently.Before the Court could proceed with the case, the Bench Secretary presented a letter from the Allahabad HCBA which was signed by its office-bearer requesting that the Court to not issue any adverse orders from November 7-9.The Court eventually agreed to adjourn the matter, while making it clear that no further adjournment would be granted to the respondents..Advocate Satish Chandra Dubey appeared for the petitioner.Advocates Abhinav Prasad and Mohit Kumar represented the respondents..[Read Order]