Lawyers' Strikes | Supreme Court Seeks Information On Abstention From Work By All District Bar Associations In UP

Pursuant to Supreme Court's rap, office bearers of the Faizabad Bar Association, Uttar Pradesh recently filed an undertaking that they will not pass any resolution, or become party to any resolution, for abstention of work. Taking into account the same, the Court expressed an inclination to expand the scope of the proceedings and called for data on abstention by all district Bar Associations across the state (atleast during 2023-24). 

The matter was before a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan, which was dealing with Faizabad Bar Association's plea against an Allahabad High Court judgment, whereby an Elders Committee was constituted to take over its affairs and ensure that the elections to its Governing Council were held by December 2024.

Taking into account the undertaking, the bench issued notice on Faizabad Bar Association's plea. Further, it ordered the impleadment of the Allahabad High Court (through its Registrar General) and service on the Elders Committee constituted by the High Court. It was also directed:

"The Registrar General of the High Court shall collect information from all the district and sessions judges of state of UP and furnish the details of abstaining from work observed by the district Bar Associations atleast during the year 2023-24."

During the hearing, Senior Advocate CU Singh, appearing for the PIL petitioners before the High Court, made submissions in support of the High Court judgment. Opposing a prayer by the Executive Committee of Faizabad Bar Association that it be allowed to continue until a new Committee is elected in December, 2024, he submitted that the Elders Committee is now functioning as an administrative committee.

After hearing the parties, the bench expressed an inclination to expand the scope of the proceedings. Justice Kant said, "This can't be confined to Faizabad Bar only. There are very serious and alarming issues in respect of various Bar Associations and we want to expand the scope of these proceedings."

Further, the bench conveyed dismay at lawyers' abstention from work for the smallest of reasons (such as bad weather). Turning to Senior Advocate K Parmeswar (who was appearing for the Allahabad High Court), Justice Kant said, "you bring on record brief details or a note about all the Bar Associations. Then we would like to issue notice to all of them".

This instruction was preceded by Parmeswar informing the bench that some courts in UP didn't even have 50% working days in last 2 years. On hearing the senior counsel, Justice Kant remarked: "This is a very serious issue. The judicial system has been paralyzed".

Be that as it may, the filing of the undertaking by Faizabad Bar Association's office bearers was deemed a welcome step. "If the advocates will start realizing their responsibilities as officers of the court, their client, the society, the system...probably each of them will realize this importance and responsibility. It will not only enhance their own status, it will also assist the system itself", Justice Kant said.

At this point, Senior Advocate Rakesh Khanna (for Faizabad Bar Association) submitted that in due course, other Bar Associations can be brought before the Court, in order to develop a uniform practice.

Refraining from issuing any interim directions at this point, the bench passed its order, clarifying that parties will be heard on the next date with regard to interim directions. It was of the view that its orders in Faizabad Bar Association's case would give incentive to district Bar Associations which are willing to "fall in line" and give an undertaking against abstention from work.

On the last date, expressing serious displeasure at the Faizabad Bar Association for allegedly calling strikes and abstaining from judicial work, the Supreme Court had called on its officer bearers to file an affidavit, undertaking that they shall never pass any such resolution in future. Notably, the concerned lawyers were stated to have abstained from judicial work for 66 days out of a total of 134 working days from November 2023 to April 2024.

CASE TITLE: FAIZABAD BAR ASSOCIATION Versus BAR COUNCIL OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS., SLP(C) No. 19804-19805/2024

Click Here To Read/Download Order