Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S., JJ
ABDULLA. H. NAUSHAD – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KERALA TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, J.
All these matters stand dismissed for default for non-appearance of counsel representing the appellant/petitioner when the matters were called.
2. Noticing the number of matters in respect of which counsel were not present in Court today, we inquired with the learned Government Pleaders who were in court, as regards the reasons for such en masse absence of counsel. We were then told that it was probably on account of a call for boycott by the Kerala High Court Advocates' Association that the learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner are not present in court today. We have also been shown a copy of a letter stated to have been written by the President of the Kerala High Court Advocates' Association to the Hon'ble the Chief Justice informing him of the call for a pen down protest by lawyers on 09.04.2025 (today). While the letter in itself is distasteful as regards its contents, it also manifests a serious breach of the decorum that is expected to be maintained in this hallowed institution. Letters addressed by an Association of Advocates to the Chief Justice of the High Court cannot take the form of gratuitous sermons interspersed with veiled
Lawyers cannot engage in strikes or boycotts, as such actions are illegal and undermine the justice system.
Lawyers have a duty to ensure the smooth functioning of the court and cannot disrupt court proceedings. Strikes interfere with the administration of justice and are against the duty of lawyers as off....
Lawyers have a duty to attend trial, and strikes interfere with the administration of justice. Courts are obligated to hear and decide cases, and lawyers have no right to go on strike or give a call ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the State Bar Council's call for strike was illegal, unconstitutional, and against statutory provisions. It also emphasized that lawyers have ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the State Bar Council has no authority to compel lawyers to abstain from work, and such actions are illegal, unconstitutional, and against sta....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the State Bar Council's call for strike was illegal and unconstitutional, and lawyers have no right to go on strike or give a call for boycott....
Disobedience of court orders by advocates constitutes grounds for contempt, leading to potential consequences including dismissal of appeals for lack of prosecution.
The right to practice law is a fundamental right protected by the Constitution, and Bar Associations cannot impose restrictions that infringe upon this right.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
