The Supreme Court in the case M/s PLR Projects Private Limited v. Mahanadi Coalfields Limited and Ors. observed and has issued the notice to the Himachal Pradesh High Court Bar Association after the High Court registrar general wrote a letter wherein it alleged that the members of the bar association had abstained from work on account of an advocate’s death.
The bench comprising of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice Sudhanshu Dhuli in the case observed wherein the court was presiding over contempt proceedings initiated against lawyers found to have engaged in violence during a strike in Odisha last year. Thus, the strike called over a long-standing demand for a permanent bench of the Orissa High Court in the western part of the state, at Sambalpur, took a violent turn as massive clashes erupted between lawyers and the police.
The bench headed by Justice Kaul passed orders to the state government and the law enforcement agency to take stringent actions against the striking lawyers and apart from the Bar Council of India suspending the license of the concerned advocates, several police arrests were also made.
The court in the case observed and has issued the directives against lawyers’ strikes and come down heavily on any abstentions from work, expressed dissatisfaction with a practice prevalent in the eastern state of suspending court work as a mark of respect for deceased lawyers.
The court in the case observed and has served notice to a bar association in Odisha after it abstained from court work for a day on grounds of a member’s death, the bench repeated that judicial work cannot be brought to a standstill even though a lawyer’s death is a tragic event.
It has also been noted that after the Orissa Bar Association served the notice bar association in Himachal Pradesh. Therefore, while acting on the letter by the Himachal Pradesh High Court’s registrar-general alleging a day’s abstention from work, the court sought the Himachal Pradesh High Court Bar Association’s response.
The bench headed by Justice Kaul pronounced that the letter has been placed on record addressed by the registrar general of the Himachal Pradesh High Court, at Shimla to the Supreme Court secretary general regarding abstention of court work by a bar association.
Therefore, this being the first time that the apex court has forced striking lawyers back to work or taken critical notice of their abstention.
The court in the case observed and has issued the notice issued to the Rajasthan High Court Bar Association at Jaipur Bench over the non-appearance of advocates due to a strike.
The court while considering the facts and circumstances of the case stated that there are several such instances of the judiciary expressing exasperation with lawyers’ strikes. Therefore, in April, the Supreme Court notably requested all high courts to constitute grievance redressal committees comprising the chief justice and two other senior judges, one from the Bar and another from services. The said order was passed in a suo motu case regarding rampant strikes in bar associations across the country leading to massive disruption of the court’s work.
