Lawyers abstaining from work to condole death will be contempt of court: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court recently ordered that any act of an individual lawyer or their association to go on a strike or to give a call for strike or to abstain from work would be treated as an ex facie act of criminal contempt [In Re District Bar Association Of Prayagraj].The division bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Dr. Gautam Chowdhary directed all the District Judges in Uttar Pradesh to report any act of strike by the lawyers to the Registrar General so that appropriate proceedings can be instituted in accordance with law.The Court further issued a direction to bar bodies not to abstain from work even on account of condolence due to death of lawyer/officer/employee of court or their relatives. Any condolence meeting may be called only after 03.30 PM, it ordered.“Any violation of this direction would also be viewed as an act of ex facie contempt,” the bench made it clear..The Court observed that unless and until administration of justice is secured by the smooth and effective running of courts, the rule of law cannot be ensured.“If the courts are not allowed to function at its optimal level on account of frequent call of strikes by lawyers the very edifice on which the entire system rests may crumble,” the bench said..The Court had taken cognizance of the frequent strikes of lawyers in Prayagraj after a report from the District Judge showed that the judicial work was affected on 127 days out of the total 218 working days between July 2023 and April 2024. Taking note of a Supreme Court judgement holding that lawyers have no right to go on strike, the Court had asked the Bar Council of India (BCI), UP Bar Council and High Court Bar Association to assist it in evolving a mechanism to curb the menace of strikes in district courts of Uttar Pradesh. The report from the High Court Registrar General revealed that in the entire State of Uttar Pradesh, judicial work in the district courts is seriously hampered on account of strike call by the advocates.“The actual days of working in almost all courts are substantially curtailed thereby causing further strain on the otherwise overburdened courts in the State of Uttar Pradesh,” the bench noted..Bar Council of India Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra and Senior Counsel RK Ojha who represented the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh, told the Court that they are opposed to the lawyers going on strike and have highest esteem for the top court’s rulings on it.UP Bar Council also submitted that a resolution has already been passed by it to comply with the directions issued by the Supreme Court. It was also submitted that a resolution was also passed this year asking lawyers not to abstain from work in case of any condolence..Observing that the time had come to take effective measures to ensure strict compliance of the ban on strike by lawyers, the Court said,“People of this State have reposed faith in the Courts to resolve their dispute and protect their valuable rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India. This faith cannot be allowed to be compromised by a section of irresponsible advocates who place their own interest over and above the interest of common man. If the functioning of district judgeship is allowed to be effected in any manner, it would have an adverse cascading effect of grave proportions.”However, the Court also noted the submissions of bar bodies that advocates many a time come across genuine difficulties and hardships and since even their legitimate grievances are not considered, they are left with no option but to go on strike..Accordingly, it was suggested that a grievance redressal committee be constituted for the High Court and district courts so that genuine grievances of lawyers and litigants are addressed without lawyers being compelled to go on strike.The Court was informed that such a committee already exists at the High Court and district courts. Thereafter, it was suggested that the District Magistrate or his nominee should be included in the committee. .The Court accepted the request and passed the following order:“We request Registrar General of this Court to issue necessary directions to all District Judges throughout State of Uttar Pradesh to include District Magistrate or his nominee not below the rank of Additional District Magistrate to be a member of the Grievance Redressal Committee formed at the district level. This would make the Grievance Redressal Committee more effective in dealing with grievance of lawyers and would thereby help in smooth functioning of the courts and facilitate dispensation of justice. Ordered accordingly.”The Court will hear the matter next on September 25..Advocate Sudhir Mehrotra represented the Court. Senior Counsel Manan Kumar Mishra and advocate Sai Girdhar appeared for the BCI.Senior Counsel RK Ojha and advocate Ashok Kumar Tiwari appeared for Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh and District Bar Association of Prayagraj..[Read Order]