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

2023 Supreme(Online)(MP) 27297

MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
, CJ
(Suo Moto) v. Chairman State Bar Council of M.P.
Suo Moto Public Interest Litigation



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: None
For the Respondents: None

The call to abstain from court work by the Bar Council violates statutory rights and Supreme Court directives.

Headnote:This suo moto public interest litigation concerns a communication by the Chairman of the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh calling for a strike by lawyers, leading to an analysis of its legality under the Advocates Act. The Court found the call to abstain from work unconstitutional as it violates statutory rights and directions of the Supreme Court established in Ex - Capt. Harish Uppal's case. Consequently, the Court directed lawyers to resume work immediately, emphasizing their duty to uphold the rule of law and the rights of litigants.

Table of Content
1. public interest litigation initiated due to lawyers' strike. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court emphasizes duty of lawyers to attend court. (Para 3 , 10 , 12)
3. absence of lawyers affects access to justice. (Para 5 , 17)
4. strike called by bar violates statutory rights. (Para 8 , 9)
5. court orders lawyers to resume work immediately, facing consequences otherwise. (Para 16 , 18)

1. This suo moto public interest litigation has been initiated as a result of the communication by the Chairman of the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh asking the entire lawyer community in the State of Madhya Pradesh to abstain from court work w.e.f. 23.03.2023.

2. The facts are that by the letter dated 20.03.2023, the Chairman of the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh addressed a communication to the Hon'ble Chief Justice to the effect that unless the scheme relating to disposal of 25 identified cases in every quarter is not withdrawn by 22.03.2023 they would protest the issue seriously. It is further stated therein that the general body in its meeting held on 18.03.2023 has unanimously resolved that if the Hon'ble High Court does not withdraw the scheme pertaining to disposal of 25 oldest cases up to 22.03.2023, all the lawyers in the State of Madhya Pradesh will collectively protest and will abstain from judicial work w.e.f. 23.03.2023. The same is marked as Annexure - A.

3. Thereafter, the Hon'ble Chief Justice vide communication dated 21.03.2023 replied to the same and stated that in pursuance to the assurances made by the Chairman of the Bar Council on 02.03.2023 as well as on 15.03.2023, the Chairman and members of the Bar Council were most welcome to submit all the issues being faced, so that the same can be considered and thereafter a meeting would be convened to resolve the issues. Copy of the same is marked as Annexure - B. In pursuance whereof, a communication was addressed to the Hon'ble Chief Justice by the Chairman, State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh dated 22.03.2023, which was received by email at 02.47 PM to the effect that disposal of 25 oldest cases scheme be adjourned for first three months or it be withdrawn immediately within 4 ***O'çlock today i.e. on 22.03.2023, so that the courts in the State of Madhya Pradesh may work properly. Copy of the same is marked as Annexure - C.
4. Subsequently, the Chairman of the Bar Council of India addressed a communication dated 23.03.2023 to the respondent No.1 and a copy to the Hon'ble Chief Justice through the Registrar General. In terms of the said communication, the Bar Council of India has directed the State Bar Council to take immediate steps for withdrawal of the call for strike immediately by the Bar Council as well as by the Bar Associations of the State. The copy of the same is produced as Annexure - D. In flagrant violation of the direction issued by the Bar Council of India, the respondent No.1 has directed all the advocates to abstain from work.

5. On 23.03.2023, we found that advocates were not present in our court as well as at the Benches at Indore and Gwalior. They were also absent in other courts of the State. Therefore, the Registrar General has been directed to obtain a report from each one of the courts in the State of Madhya Pradesh with regard to the happenings on 23.03.2023.

6. Keeping in mind the seriousness and the interest of the poor litigants at large, for the present, we are of the considered view that the following are required as respondents: -
Respondent No.1 : Chairman, State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh
Respondent No.2 : President, High Court Bar Association, Jabalpur
Respondent No.3 : President, High Court Bar Association, Indore
Respondent No.4 : President, High Court Bar Association, Gwalior
Respondent No.5 : President, High Court Advocates' Bar Association, Jabalpur
Respondents : President of each of the Bar Associations No.6 to 236 in the State of Madhya Pradesh.

7. We are extremely shocked, worried and pained about the manner in which things have unfolded
























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