SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(All) 2066

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Ashwani Kumar Mishra, Gautam Chowdhary, JJ.
In Re : - Applicant
Versus
District Bar Association of Prayagraj - Respondent
Contempt Application (Criminal) No. 12 of 2024
Decided On : 07-08-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Applicant : Sudhir Mehrotra
For the Respondent: Ashok Kumar Tiwari, Sai Girdhar, Shivendu Ojha, Manan Kumar Mishra and R.K. Ojha

Lawyers have no right to strike, as established by the Supreme Court, and any such action will be treated as criminal contempt.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 141 - Contempt of Court - Lawyers' strike - The Court addressed the issue of lawyers' strikes in Uttar Pradesh, noting that strikes occurred on 127 out of 218 working days, severely hampering judicial functions. The Supreme Court's judgment in Ex. Captain Harish Uppal v. Union of India, (2003) 2 SCC 45, established that lawyers have no right to strike, which constitutes contempt and professional misconduct. The Court directed Bar Associations to cease strikes and proposed a Grievance Redressal Committee to address lawyers' grievances without resorting to strikes. (Paras 1-22)

(B) Professional Conduct - The Court emphasized the need for lawyers to adhere to the law and resolutions of the Bar Council, warning that any strike would be treated as criminal contempt. (Paras 14-22)

(C) Judicial Administration - The Court highlighted the detrimental impact of strikes on the administration of justice and the rule of law, urging compliance with Supreme Court directives. (Paras 11-13)

Findings of Court:
The Court mandated that any strike by lawyers in Uttar Pradesh would be treated as criminal contempt and directed the establishment of Grievance Redressal Committees at both High Court and District Court levels to address legitimate grievances.

Result: Strikes by lawyers in Uttar Pradesh declared as criminal contempt.

JUDGMENT :

Cognizance in this contempt case was taken on a report received from District Judge, Prayagraj, indicating that between July 2023 to April, 2024 the lawyers in District Court, Prayagraj abstained from work/resorted to strike on 127 days out of total working of 218 days. The Court functioned only for 41.74% days while strike was resorted to on 58.26% days. Notices were issued to the office bearers of Bar Association and other advocates responsible in the matter.

2. This Court took note of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Ex. Captain Harish Uppal v. Union of India, (2003) 2 SCC 45, wherein the Constitution Bench of the Court held that lawyers have no right to go on strike or even token strike or even give a call for strike. Even prior to the judgment in Ex. Captain Harish Uppal (supra) the Supreme Court in the case of Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India, (1998) 4 SCC 409, held that going on strike by lawyers is not only contempt of Court but also amounts to professional misconduct. This position in law has been consistently reiterated in a series of judgments of the Supreme Court, including the judgments in the case of Common Cause v. Union of India, (2006) 9 SCC 295, Krishnakant Tamrakar v. State of M.P., (2018) 17 SCC 27, District Bar Association Dehradun through its Secretary v. Ishwar, (2020) 17 SCC 672 and In Re: Assault on Two Members of the Supreme Court Bar Association at District Court Complex, Gautam Budh Nagar, (2024) SCC Online SC 1016. As the issue raised had a far reaching impact on administration of justice we requested the highest advocates body at the national and state level to assist the Court in evolving mechanism to handle the menace of strike by the advocates. In the order of the Court passed on 31.5.2024 this Court observed as under :

    ''10. We also request the Chairman, Bar Council of India, Chairman, U.P. Bar Council and the President of the High Court Bar Association and the Advocates Association to assist the Court in evolving mechanism to forthwith discontinue the menace of strike in the District Courts of Uttar Pradesh. The Registrar General of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad is also directed to obtain a report from all the District Judges of the State of Uttar Pradesh regarding the number of actual working days in a month and the corresponding days of abstinence from work/strike between 1st July, 2023 to 30th April, 2024 by the next date fixed.''

3. The matter was adjourned on 8.7.2024 and again on 16.7.2024. After hearing learned counsels appearing for the Bar Council of India and Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh as also the learned counsels appearing for the District Bar Association, Prayagraj and High Court Bar Association we issued following directions on 16.7.2024 :

    ''1. Pursuant to the orders passed on previous occasion learned counsels representing the Bar Council of India and Uttar Pradesh Bar Council have filed their respective affidavits.

    2. The Court is informed that the Chairman of Bar Council of India has held a meeting with the respective stakeholders and a fresh meeting on the aspect relating to holding of strike in the different district Courts of Uttar Pradesh is proposed to be held within next two weeks.

    3. Shri Sai Girdhar, learned counsel representing the Bar Council of India informs that the Bar Council of India is committed to maintenance of peaceful working without any uncalled for strike by the lawyers and that appropriate modalities in that regard would be finalized soon. A statement is made that the Chairman, Bar Council of India will remain personally present on the next occasion to assist the Court for ensuring that strikes are not allowed in district Courts.

    4. The statement made on behalf of Bar Council of India has been adopted by the counsel appearing for the Uttar Pradesh Bar Council as also by Shri R.K. OJha, Senior Advocate, who represents the District Bar Association, Prayagraj.

    5. We hope and trust that by the next date of listing

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    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

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top