THE SPONSORING OF STRIKE BY ADVOCATES.

[yogesh saxena]

THE SPONSORING OF STRIKE BY ADVOCATES.
The litigant engages an Advocate for sponsoring his cause and thus the
advocates are held responsible for non-appearance solely to a strike
call. The Hon’ble Supreme court has laid down “when the advocate
engaged by a party is on strike there is no obligation on the part of
the court either to wait or to adjourn the case on that account. Time
and again the Hon’ble Supreme Court has said that an advocate has no
right to stail the court proceedings on the ground that advocate have
decided to strike or to boycott the courts or even boycott any
particular court.”
This view has been expressed by several times and it has been
reiterated in Raman Service Pvt. Limited vs. Subhash Kapoor 2001(1)
SCC Page 118.
The purpose of the Bar Association is to sponsor the cause which may
provide the glorified status to the identity of an Advocate. There
were the consistent struggle between the individual cause and the
cause of the society. Ultimately on every juncture the society got the
upper hand instead of the selfish individual gain at the cost of the
society. Since the unscrupulous elements associated with the
organization have taken over the command, the benevolent causes are
sacrificed. The glorified traditions which the Allahabad High Court
Bar Association was maintaining from a long period, there were the
alarming situation of perpetuating the cause of the individual person.
The seasoned members of the Bar were facing difficulty in tackling
with the situation. Thus the creation of Advocate Association, High
Court, Allahabad has come into existence in the year of 1993. No one
can ever imagine that in the later period, the motto behind creating
the dual Bar Association within the campus of Allahabad High Court ,
will swept away with the same trend as witnessed at the time of
creation of the Advocate Association.
The office-bearers of the Advocate Association have the responsibility
to behave in a decent manner and they may not let down the image of
the glorious tradition maintained at the Bar Association. This was the
spirit behind the purpose when I contested the election of the Vice-
President of Advocate Association. After having the responsibility of
the office-bearers in the aforesaid capacity, I realised that every
thing is not working according to the wishes of the masses of the
Advocates. I found with a profound sorrow to witness that those
Advocates who are sponsor to raise the cause of the litigants, have
failed to sponsor their own cause of maintaining the high tradition of
the Bar Association. This was also the reason for joining as Vice-
President that at least now I will have my say in the activities
detrimental to the activity of the Bar Association. Unfortunately I
could not able to do the needful in this regard.
This was the first meeting at the residence of senior Advocate Sri
Ravi Kiran Jain, the member of governing body of the Advocate
Association of High Court Allahabad. I was having my reservation for
such meeting at the residence of some Advocate. However, on being
invited by the President to decide the future course of strike. This
was done immediately after the call of the strike within a very short
period. There was no occasion to take a descending note on the issue
as to whether the Hon’ble Law Minister Sri Arun Jaitely is making a
correct statement regarding consultation with the Hon’ble Chief
Justice of Allahabad High Court before creating the Bench/ Circuit
Bench of High Court at Allahabad. Although I have my reservation on
such type of the question to get them answered without looking into
the provisions of the statute and the case law on the aforesaid point,
but when the draft was prepared by Sri Jain criticizing the Hon’ble
Law Minister I requested the senior Advocate not to raise such issue
in the meeting of the office-bearers of Advocate Association of High
Court Allahabad. I requested that after the decision of Supreme
Advocate on record Association case reported in 1993 (4) SCC 441 and
Supreme Court Bar Association Case 1998 (4)SCC Page 409, the decision
even if it is related with the entry made in the union list of the
seventh schedule of our constitution entry no. 78 and 79 of list-1,
the formation of the circuit bench may not be done without taking the
consultation/consent from the respective High Court. Since the Hon’ble
Chief Justice and the other Hon’ble Judges represents the High Court,
the question of formation of a circuit bench may be done only after
taking such consent which has yet not given by the Hon’ble High Court.
I also made a reference to the case law of Federation of Bar
Association in Karnataka vs. Union of India reported in A.I.R. 2000
S.C. 2544, but Sri Ravi Kiran Jain has declined to score out such
delicate issue from the resolution of the Advocate Association.
Ultimately I made a contact with senior Advocate Sri A.D. Giri who has
been assigned as a chairman of action committee and is whole to sole
along with two other senior Advocates to nominate the President of the
Advocate Association. I said that it is my duty not to get such type
of resolution being passed with the manner treating the resolution of
the responsible body of Advocate Association, but he enquired that why
he has been contacted by me on telephone. He said that he is not even
the office-bearer of the Advocate Association. Since I was considering
it to be a serious matter and as such I said that since he remained on
the prestigious post of Solicitor General of India and as such no such
resolution may be given effect without conducting a debate in the
issue and it may be placed before the General House for approval.
Since there was counter reaction on my proposal, I contacted the
General Secretary of Advocate Association to convey my opinion. He
said that he is against any such resolution, but since Sri A.D.Giri
has sent it for taking his signature and as such he has signed the
aforesaid resolution. Ultimately the said resolution was declared to
be passed by the Advocate Association under the authority of the
President of the said Association.
I have a profound bleeding at my heart to see the situation that how
the other Advocates like me have been treated and manhandled even for
presentation of the cases in person by the litigants themselves. The
entire strike is politically motivated by so called guardian of the
Bar Association. It has affected number of the litigants, Advocates
and the staff associated in the process of presentation of the matter
before the Hon’ble Court. The mental agony is multiplied by looking
into the fact that few seniors Advocate associated on account of some
political motivation, due to their personal vendetta and on account of
their superiority complex is crucifying the interest of so many
litigants and associated members by continuing the strike. It is
seldom taken into consideration that a camel may be passed through eye
of needle, but you can not search a devoteous person in the majority.
The same situation, likewise is apparent within the campus of the
Hon’ble High Court. Some of the Advocates have swept away on account
of their impulsive attitude without knowing as to what will be the
consequences of keeping on the strike for such a long period. I have
strong appeal to mourn on the issue of strike and get the strike be
lay inside its grave for ever and the Advocates of this High Court may
not sponsor such strike and be adhere to the norms prescribed under
the noble profession of Advocate.