Cont.Pet.(C) 550/2015 in W.P.(C) 821/1990
Contempt Petition against lawyers strike

Contempt Petition against lawyers strike

Common Cause has filed a contempt petition against the strike of lawyers in Delhi High Court and all district courts of Delhi on the issue of conflict over pecuniary jurisdiction. In WP (C) 821/1990 (Harish Uppal vs Union of India) the Supreme Court had observed that lawyers had no right to go on strike and could not give any call for boycott. The court also held that lawyers refusing to respond to such a call could not be visited with any adverse consequences by the Bar Association or the Bar Council.

The matter was last taken up on January 13, 2017. After hearing the counsels, the Court ordered that reply, if any, be filed within six weeks.

On July 4, 2019, our counsel, Mr. Prashant Bhushan informed the bench consisting Justice Arun Mishra and Justice Aniruddha Bose that the Bar Council of India is neither enforcing its own resolutions nor effectively taking control of disciplinary matter. 

Following up on this, the bench has ordered:

Let BCI file entire data showing what it has done for implementation of its Resolutions as well as disciplinary matters pending throughout the country with various Disciplinary Committees 1 of the various State Bar Councils and how many matters on disciplinary side are pending before the BCI and for how long. Let data of all the State Bar Councils be furnished on an affidavit and also the data with respect to the periodic strikes and cease work which are taking place in the country at various places and reasons for that and also whether the State Bar Councils have initiated any disciplinary action against the lawyers for indulging into the strikes which are not permissible and contrary to the Resolution(s) of the Bar Council of India and the judgment(s) of this Court.

The Court further ordered the BCI to file the affidavit by September 20, 2019 through the Secretary, Bar Council of India. The other alleged contemnors are also ordered to file their response.

On September 23, 2019, the bench consisting Justices Arun Mishra & S. Ravindra Bhat directed to list this petition on a non-miscellaneous day in the third week of October, 2019.

On 2nd November 2022, the bench comprising of Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia directed the matter to be listed on 6th December 2022.

On 3rd November 2022, the bench comprising of Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia directed the matter to be listed on 6th December 2022 along with Contempt Petition (C) No. 550 of 2015.

On 6th December 2022, the bench comprising of Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia directed the matters to be listed on 24th January 2023.

On 24th January 2023, the bench comprising of Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice Bela M. Trivedi directed the matters to be listed on 16th March 2023.

On 28th March 2023, the bench comprising of Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice Sanjay Kumar directed the matters to be listed on 17th April 2023.

On 17th April 2023, the bench comprising of Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice Sanjay Kumar directed the matters to be listed on 8th May 2023.

On 8th May 2023, the bench comprising of Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice Sanjay Kumar directed the matters to be listed on 17th July 2023.

The contempt petition filed by Common Cause against the strike of lawyers in Delhi High Court and all district courts of Delhi on the issue of conflict over pecuniary jurisdiction was heard on July 17, 2023 by the bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia.

The Bar Council of India placed the Draft Rules for consideration on record and handed over the copies to Mr Bhushan on the same day. Two weeks have been given to the petitioner to comment on the submission.

The Bench also asked the Bar Council of India to submit a report compiling details of the action taken by State Bar Councils against lawyers who went on strike or boycott of courts in the last year. Additionally, the BCI also asked to file an affidavit detailing the draft rules it has framed on disciplinary action that may be taken against striking lawyers. Admonishing the strikes, Justice Kaul said

“You can have a difference of views. Not necessary that people have to think alike. But like we have said before, you cannot boycott courts of law, stop people from getting bail or the administration of justice...”

During the past few hearings of the contempt petition, the BCI counsel kept asking for longer to frame and amend the rules concerning prevention of strikes and dealing with striking lawyers. In the last hearing on May 8, 2023, the Chairman BCI submitted that a meeting of the representatives of all the State Bar Councils has also taken place to finalise the rules. The Court took note of the submission that pursuant to the decision taken in these meetings, the BCI is actively considering the necessary amendment to the Rules.

On January 24, 2024, the draft rules were placed before the Supreme Court by Mr. Manan Mishra, learned senior counsel. It was noted that according to Mr. Manan Mishra, learned senior counsel, the suggestions given by Mr. Prashant Bhushan have also been taken into consideration before framing of these draft rules. However, Mr. Prashant Bhushan though does not agree with these submissions made by Mr. Manan Mishra.

The Court observed, “Mr. Manan Mishra has, however, made a statement before this Court that these rules may be examined and if any suggestion come from this Court, the same shall be accepted by the Bar Council without any condition. The rules, therefore, needs to be examined in detail.”


Download :

Contempt Petition (C) 550 of 2015 in WP 821 of 1990
Harish Uppal v Union of India-Dec 2002
ROP_13.1.2017
Order 04.07.2019
Order 23.09.2019
Order_02.11.2022
Order_03.11.2022
Order_06.12.2022
Order_24.01.2023
Order_28.03.2023
Order_17.04.2023
Order_08.05.2023
Order_17.07.2023
Order_24 Jan 2024