Boycotts announced by Bar Associations are illegal, infringing on the right to access justice and the professional duties of advocates.

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)

The writ on hand has been instituted to direct the second respondent herein to revoke the boycott announced and allow the advocates to attend the Court proceedings.

2.The petitioner states that he is a practicing Advocate at Kovilpatti Court, other District Courts as well as practicing before Madurai Bench of Madras High Court. The Second respondent, Kovilpatti Bar Association announced a continuous boycott of Courts since 05.08.2025. The very intention of the boycott of the Association is to close FIR registered against one Advocate, namely, Purushothaman, who had a quarrel with one bus driver of Transport Corporation, namely, Ramakrishnan. It was a personal dispute between the lawyer and the Bus Driver of the Transport Corporation, which resulted in the announcement of boycott of entire Association, thereby, abstaining from the Court proceedings. The petitioner requested the second respondent to revoke the continuous boycott declared from 05.08.2025. However, it was not considered. Therefore, the present writ petition came to be instituted.

3.It was brought to the notice of this Court that subsequently, the boycott came to an end and the lawyers resumed their practice. This Court has elaborately considered the legal principles relating to announcement of boycotts, which is declared as illegal by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. The issues are more elaborately considered in W.P(MD)Nos.30229 of 2024 and 15388 of 2025, dated 19.08.2025 and the same is extracted hereunder:-

“The writs on hand have been instituted challenging the validity of the action initiated by the Nagarcoil Bar Association debarring the petitioner from entering into the Bar Association premises and withdrawing his name from the list of members of the said Association.

2.The petitioner states that he is a practicing lawyer and enrolled himself as an advocate with the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry and his enrollment number is 744/1995. The petitioner is practicing legal profession for about 3 decades. The Nagarcoil Bar Association convened a general body meeting and resolved to boycott Courts and abstain from appearing before the Courts in Kanyakumari District on 18.11.2024, 21.11.2024 and 22.11.2024. The reason for declaring boycott was that an Advocate from Hosur in Krishnagiri District was murdered by an Advocate Clerk. The petitioner states that he attended in the Court proceedings and defended his client before the District Court premises at Nagarcoil. He was teased by other Advocates and the petitioner states that he was ill-treated.

3.The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the second respondent, Nagarcoil Bar Association would oppose by stating that the conduct of the petitioner in the Bar Association is not in accordance with the bylaws. He used to disrespect the members of the Bar Association and he has committed certain misconducts and action was initiated against him by Nagarcoil Bar Association. The petitioner appeared before Judicial Magistrate-II, Nagarcoil, on 21.11.2024 and no one prevented him from attending the Court proceedings.

4.Allegations and counter allegations are made between the petitioner and the Nagarcoil Bar Association. Such disputed facts need not be adjudicated in the present writ proceedings. It is for the parties to resolve the same. Considering the incident that had happened in 2024, this Court is of the considered view that the brotherhood between the lawyers are to be maintained in the interest of judicial administration as they are the first Officers of the Court. They are not expected to pick up quarrel on flimsy grounds. Abstaining Court proceedings is an illegal act as declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in several judgments. Law relating to boycotts are no more res integra and settled by the Apex Court. When a particular Bar Association d