The Allahabad High Court on Thursday voiced dissatisfaction with a letter from the High Court Bar Association (HCBA), which requested that the Court refrain from issuing any "adverse orders" in cases where lawyers were absent due to their work abstention.
"It is unfortunate that constitution law Court's functioning is put on hold without considering importance of public time and public money, besides object to ensure speedy justice delivery system. A Bar Association should understand that Courts working is governed under the rules of the Court and vacations/holidays are already scheduled and except for compelling and unavoidable circumstances, like natural calamities, pandemic etc.," the Court added.
The Court further emphasized that, in the future, any requests for 'no adverse orders' must be backed by formal resolutions adopted by the Bar Association.
"The convenience of Bar Association in any pressing or any unavoidable circumstances are always respected so as to entertain request for no adverse orders, but for that Bar Association or its Executive Body is expected to pass resolution ... It is expected that in future whenever Bar Association wants such letters to be circulated to the benches of the High Court seeking no adverse orders, it is always supported by resolution to be adopted by the Bar Association in general and in exceptional circumstances by its Executive Body, the Court said in the November 7 order.
The Court stressed that its operations should not be disrupted by the absence of some advocates, especially when their unavailability is due to personal reasons, such as religious rituals. In such instances, the judge advised that lawyers should submit individual adjournment requests, which the Court generally accommodates.
"But for untoward incidents when Advocates may not attend the Court, entire Courts working should not be generally affected and that too for certain number of Advocates not able to attend the Court for their personal religious rituals to be performed at home. In such a situation individual request for adjournment should be made and in such a case Court may certainly entertain such requests for adjournment," the Court said.
The Court made these observations after being asked to adjourn a hearing scheduled for November 7. It noted that the respondents' counsel was absent, having missed the previous hearing as well, while the petitioner’s counsel urged an urgent hearing of the matter. Before proceeding, the Bench Secretary presented a letter from the Allahabad HCBA, signed by an office-bearer, requesting that the Court refrain from issuing adverse orders from November 7-9. Ultimately, the Court agreed to adjourn the matter but clarified that no further adjournments would be granted to the respondents.
Advocate Satish Chandra Dubey appeared for the petitioner.
Advocates Abhinav Prasad and Mohit Kumar represented the respondents.
