Allahabad High Court Urges Bar Council to Formulate Policy to Prevent Lawyer Strikes

The Allahabad High Court has advised the Bar Council of India (BCI) President Manan Mishra and the Uttar Pradesh Bar Council President Shivkishor Gaur to collaboratively develop a policy to prevent frequent strikes by lawyers. The court has scheduled the next hearing for August 7. This directive was issued by a bench comprising Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Gautam Chaudhary during the hearing of a criminal contempt petition against the District Bar Association, Prayagraj.

The criminal contempt petition was filed in May based on a report from the District Judge concerning the disruption of judicial work due to frequent strikes by the District Bar Association.

Reports Sought from All District Judges

In an earlier hearing, the bench had requested reports from all district judges in the state and ordered the Bar Council to take steps to prevent strikes. Senior advocate RK Ojha, representing the Bar Association, argued that the Bar Council should address the issue. Consequently, the bench sought a report on measures to prevent strikes from the presidents of the national and state Bar Councils. Advocate Sudhir Mehrotra represented the High Court, and the Registrar General presented reports from all district judges, which were then shared with the Bar Council for action.

 Judicial Work Disrupted

In the previous hearing, the bench referred to the Registrar General’s report, which highlighted that judicial work in most district courts was significantly affected by the strikes. The bench also inquired about the implementation of Supreme Court guidelines to prevent strikes.

Supreme Court Declares Strikes Illegal

The Supreme Court, in the Harish Uppal case and others, has declared lawyer strikes illegal, stating that advocates do not have the right to strike.

On May 31, the bench issued a show-cause notice to the President and Secretary of the District Bar Association, Prayagraj, seeking an explanation as to why criminal contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them for paralyzing the courts and interfering with the administration of justice through their strike proposals.

The court instructed the Registrar General to collect data from district judges on the number of working days between July 1, 2023, and April 30, 2024, and the days affected by strikes. According to the report from the District Judge, Prayagraj, out of 218 working days in this period, strikes occurred on 127 days, meaning that judicial work was conducted on only 41.74% of working days, while strikes disrupted 58.26% of the days.

Based on this report, the Chief Justice, in an order dated May 29, 2024, deemed this a case of criminal contempt in light of the Supreme Court's ruling in the Harish Uppal case and filed the case before the court. The court also sought reports from all district judges in the state regarding lawyer strikes.