Prayagraj Lawyers On Strike For 58% Of Working Days: High Court Issues 'Contempt' Show-Cause Notice To District Bar Association

A bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Mohd. Azhar Husain Idrisi has also asked the Chairman of the Bar Council of India, the Chairman of the U.P. Bar Council, 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 the strike in the District Courts of Uttar Pradesh.”

Importantly, the Court has also directed the Registrar General of the High Court to obtain a report from all the District Judges of the State regarding the number of actual working days in a month and the corresponding days of abstinence from work/strike between 1 July 2023 and 30 April 2024 by the next date fixed.

The Court passed this order in a criminal contempt case registered under the orders of the Chief Justice after receiving a report from the District Judge, Prayagraj, specifying the days worked in the district judgeship at Prayagraj between 1 July 2023 and 30 April 2024.

The report revealed that between July 2023 and April 2024, the total number of working days at the District Court Prayagraj was 218, and out of them, the lawyers abstained from work or resorted to strike on 127 days which severely disrupted judicial proceedings and the administration of justice.

The report stated that, in percentage terms, District Court Prayagraj's actual work was 41.74%, while strike/abstinence from work was 58.26%.

Hearing the matter last week, the division bench noted that the strike figures unequivocally demonstrated that the menace of strike/abstinence from work has “virtually crippled the justice dispensation system at the District Court Prayagraj”.

“Resort to strike as a matter of routine for almost 60% of the working days over a period of 10 months goes to show that the judgeship at Prayagraj is working almost at 40% of its capacity. Incalculable harm is caused to the litigants and the cause of justice. The above figures clearly go to show that functioning of the district court stands substantially paralysed on account of indiscriminate resort to strike by the Lawyers,” the Court noted.

Significantly, the Court added that the act of the District Court Bar Association, Prayagraj, not only amounted to gross interference in the administration of justice and thereby contempt of court but also “dents” the very edifice on which the rule of law rests.

The Court further stressed that the law concerning strikes by the lawyers has been settled in a series of judgments delivered by the Supreme Court of India, including in Ex. Captain Harish Uppal Vs. Union of India (2003), wherein the Top Court held that lawyers have no right to go on strike or even token strike or give a call for a strike.

Against this backdrop, the Court went ahead to issue notice to the President and Secretary of the District Court Bar Association, Prayagraj to show cause as to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against for obstructing the proceedings of the District Court Prayagraj between 1st July, 2023 to 30th April 2024.

The matter will be heard on July 8