LAGATAR24 DESK
New Delhi, April 20: In an important development relating to lawyers’ strike, the Supreme Court on Thursday requested all high courts to constitute grievance redressal committees comprising the chief justice and two other senior judges, one from the Bar and another from services, reports LiveLaw.
A bench of Justices MR Shah and Ahsanuddin Amanullah was hearing a suo motu case regarding rampant strikes in bar associations across the country leading to massive disruption of the court’s work.
While reiterating that no member of the Bar could go on a strike and abstain themselves from work, the bench held that it was important to have an appropriate forum to ‘ventilate’ their genuine grievances. Accordingly, it urged the constitution of grievance redressal committees in all high courts, headed by the chief justice. The two senior judges who would be on the committee would be nominated by the chief justice, as well as the advocate general, the chairman of the state bar council, and the president of the high court bar association.
The bench further recommended, “The high court may also constitute similar grievance redressal committee at the district court level.”
With regard to the objective of such committees, the bench explained that it could consider genuine grievances related to any difference of opinion or dissatisfaction arising out of any procedural changes relating to the filing or listing of matters, as well as any genuine grievances pertaining to misbehaviour by any member of the lower judiciary. Such allegation of misbehaviour, the bench clarified, must be genuine and not designed to ‘keep the pressure’ on a judicial officer.
Finally, with a direction to the registry to send copies of this order to the registrar generals of high courts, the suo motu petition was disposed of.
Background
In March, the Bar Council of India agreed before the Supreme Court to suggest the nature of grievances which can be considered by the Grievance Redressal Committees, which are proposed to be set up at local levels to avert the strikes by lawyers.
Senior Advocate Manan Mishra, Chairman of the BCI had told the Supreme Court regarding the suggestion previously.
In 2021, the Supreme Court mulled the constitution of grievance committees at local levels to address the problem of lawyers’ strikes.
“This has already been stated by this Court at least10 times; not to go strike”, the Court remarked while adding that the committees were for the individual High Courts to consider.
On February 28, 2020, the Supreme Court, taking a serious note of the fact that despite consistent decisions of the Court, the lawyers/Bar Associations go on strikes, had taken suo moto cognisance and issued notices to the Bar Council of India and all the State Bar Councils to suggest the further course of action and to give concrete suggestions to deal with the problem of strikes/abstaining the work by the lawyers.
The suo motu action of the Court came while dismissing an appeal filed by the District Bar Association Dehradun against a judgment of the Uttarakhand High Court which declared the lawyers’ strikes illegal.
In that judgement, a bench comprising Justices Arun Mishra and M R Shah categorically had held that boycott of courts by advocates was illegal, and cannot be justified as an exercise of right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India.
