'Lawyers Strike Is Not A Single Solution, Provokes Situation': Hon’ble Apex Court Accepts Apology Of Rajasthan High Court Bar Association For Court Boycott

The Supreme Court accepted the 'unconditional & unqualified apology' tendered by Rajasthan High Court Bar Association, Jaipur and closed contempt proceedings appointed against them for boycotting a bench of the High Court on September 27 as part of a strike.

A Bench consisting Justice M.R. Shah and Justice Sanjiv Khanna passed the direction after perusing the affidavits and resolution filed by the office bearers of the Bar Association. On the last occasion, November 17th, Supreme Court had rejected the affidavits of apology tendered by the Rajasthan High Court Bar Association at Jaipur for boycotting a court, observing that the apology was not unconditional and unqualified.

The Court had also guided the office bearers of the Association to come up with a better affidavit and also to come out with a Resolution stating that the Bar Association in future shall not repeat the acts of boycotting Single Judge's court, go on strike, pressurise the Chief Justice of the High Court to change the Roster of a particular Judge or the Bench and pressurise Chief Justice and/or any other Judge(s) in any manner whatsoever.

The Bench noted that the office bearers while offering an unconditional apology, have condemned manner in which members of the Bar acted and conducted the strike. It also noted that the Association has passed a resolution on November 23 resolving not to resort to court boycotts or strikes in future.

The Bench therefore recorded "In view of the above, unconditional and unqualified apology tendered by office bearers of Bar Association and their statement on affidavit that they shall not go on strike on any ground whatsoever in future or pressurise Chief Justice or any other Judge to change roster of particular judge or Bench and no pressure tactic shall be adopted in future and they will resolve their conflicts by methods, we accept unconditional & unqualified apology tendered & we close the contempt proceedings. Contempt notices are discharged."

The Bench further observed that in future if it is found that the members and office bearers of Bar Association have acted against their resolution, a very serious view will be taken and the matter will be viewed very seriously.

Although the bench closed the contempt proceedings, it made strong oral remarks against the Association for its decision to hold a strike.

Justice Shah said, “We did not expect this from Rajasthan High Court (Association).This has not happened for the first time, earlier also this has happened. We'll pass a detailed order that anything repeated in future will be viewed seriously”.

Justice Shah said, “We don't say members of Bar aren't right, At times members of Bar may have genuine grievances but this is not method of resorting grievance".

The Bench said, “Strike Not A solution, It Only Aggravates the Situation: SC "This is not manner in which you go on strike, this isn't a solution also. On contrary it aggravates the situation to go on strike, raise slogans in courtrooms etc this isn't the way to resolve".

Redressal between Bar and Bench should be Cordial: SC Justice Shah stated that the redressal between Bar and Bench should be cordial, and strikes will only further spoilt the relations.

Justice Shah said, “Bar is also a part of Justice delivery system. So they should also act responsibly. What message will you give to society? That a noble profession, are going on strike and raising slogans in courtroom. Despite several orders this is happening. Bar Council of India needs to take a call."

Threatening Chief Justice Holding Strikes " Dangerous Trend" "Browbeating": SC The Bench stated that threatening the Chief Justice of a High Court to change the roster or to decide in a particular way has become a dangerous trend.

What message will be given, go on strike, judge is strict or not accommodative, pressurise Chief Justice and get roster changed and achieve the result! It is a dangerous trend Its nothing but brow beating. This can't be tolerated." Justice Shah said.

On February 28, 2020, the Supreme Court, taking a serious note of the fact that despite consistent decisions of the Court, the lawyers/Bar Association go on strikes, had taken suo moto cognisance and issued notices to the Bar Council of India and all the State Bar Councils to suggest the further course of action and to give concrete suggestions to deal with the problem of strikes/abstaining the work by the lawyers.

The suo motu action of the Court came while dismissing an appeal filed by the District Bar Association Dehradun against a judgment of the Uttarakhand High Court which declared the lawyers strikes illegal.