Justice Paralyzed: Rajasthan High Court Declares Indefinite Staff Strike 'Illegal'

In a stern rebuke to the ongoing cessation of activities within the subordinate judiciary, the High Court of Rajasthan (Jaipur Bench) has declared the mass leave currenty observed by district court staff as "illegal and uncalled for." The court’s order, delivered by Justice Ashok Kumar Jain, signals an uncompromising stance on maintaining the sanctity and functionality of the state's judicial infrastructure.

The Backdrop: A System at a Standstill

The dispute originates from a move by the Rajasthan Nyayik Karamchari Sangh , the state union representing judicial employees, which initiated an indefinite mass leave on July 18, 2025. The union seeks a restructuring of cadre strength, a demand the High Court noted is already under active consideration through the State Level Committee for judicial infrastructure.

However, the High Court took sharp exception to the manner of this agitation. The Bench observed that the move to strike paralyzed the functioning of subordinate courts, leaving litigants—many of whom are vulnerable and impoverished—without access to justice. Furthermore, the court criticized the Sangh for addressing their grievances directly to the Chief Minister, bypassing the Registrar General and sidestepping internal disciplinary channels.

The Court’s Reasoning: Independence and Discipline

Justice Ashok Kumar Jain emphasized that discipline is the cornerstone of any judicial institution. Drawing upon the precedent set by the Supreme Court in * T.K. Rangarajan Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu (2003)*, the court reiterated that government employees possess no fundamental right to strike.

The court further bolstered its position by referencing * Harish Uppal Vs. Union of India (2003)*, noting: > "When in a system, lawyers who are indispensable part of the system in providing access to justice cannot resort to strike then how can employees who are getting bread and butter from money paid as tax by poor citizens of this country can resort to a strike."

The judgment underscored that while the demand for cadre restructuring is a policy matter falling under the domain of the State, the method of protest adopted by the staff crossed the threshold of tolerable conduct, effectively disrupting an "essential service."

A Resolute Mandate for Restoration

The High Court has issued a series of contingency directives to ensure that the courts remain operational despite the ongoing defiance:

1. Immediate Resumption: All district judiciary employees were ordered to report to duty by 10:00 A.M. on July 25, 2025.
2. Contingency Workforce: Should the strike continue, District Judges are authorized to collaborate with District Collectors to deploy IT assistants and Home Guards to bridge the operational gap.
3. Pro-Bono Support: District Judges have been asked to seek the assistance of young lawyers to ensure that the "chariot of justice" does not grind to a halt.
4. Disciplinary Consequences: The order makes it clear that District Judges have the full authority to initiate disciplinary proceedings, including suspensions, transfers, and the issuance of charge-sheets against the agitators.

Key Observations

The judgment leaves no doubt regarding the gravity of the situation, stating:

• "Discipline is the key of success of any institution and judiciary is known for maintaining its own discipline."
• "In case any record or any document is found as missing during this temporary work arrangement then the liability and responsibility is of the employee who is permanently posted on that particular seat."
• "The Bar Association is also requested to assist respective District Judge(s) as it is need of the hour to show that the Bar and Bench are the two wheels of same chariot of justice."
• "The abstention of work or mass leave by judicial employees of Subordinate Courts (District Courts) of State is illegal and uncalled for."

The matter is set for further review on July 29, 2025. As the state waits to see if the judicial machinery returns to normalcy, the Rajputana bench has made one thing clear: the temple of justice will not be held hostage by internal agitation.