E-Paper
Punjab and Haryana HC Bar withdraws resolution on boycott of CJ court
In a statement on Saturday, the Bar body said that differences have been “ironed out” in a meeting between the chief justice (CJ) and Bar body members
The Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association (PHHCBA) has withdrawn its May 7 resolution boycotting chief justice RS Jha’s court.
In a statement on Saturday, the Bar body said that differences have been “ironed out” in a meeting between the chief justice (CJ) and Bar body members. The Bar association has also withdrawn its appeal from Bar Council of India (BCI) against the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana’s (BCPH) decision to stay the resolution on the boycott, the Bar body said.
It was on Friday last that PHHCBA had decided to boycott hearings before the chief justice and sought his transfer, a decision stayed by BCPH, a statutory body, within hours. Subsequently, PHHCBA had also moved BCI against the Bar Council decision, but got no relief. The BCI had said that it was not the “right time” for any agitation and more than livelihood the issue at hand is of safety.
HC Bar had passed a resolution announcing boycott claiming that even urgent nature cases were not being taken up by the high court and accused the chief justice of non-cooperation. Their main contention was that out of 46 courts only 11 are functioning and cases were being listed with prior permission from the bench — called mentioning, due to which only a handful of cases are being listed. Subsequently, the high court administration had also allowed direct listing of petitions in some categories of cases. In February too, the Bar association had decided to boycott his court.
Restore Nanda’s membership, says BCI
In another development, the BCI has asked the Bar association to restore the membership of Punjab advocate general Atul Nanda observing that “(he) has always played an exemplary and appreciable role”. His membership was revoked by the Bar association in a resolution in February for allegedly working against the interests of the lawyers. The decision was later stayed by the state Bar council.
The BCI said that differences and dissatisfaction are bound to occur in every institution, but the matter should be reported to the state Bar council concerned, which will pitch in to resolve the matter. The February resolution of HC Bar had “no leg to stand on”, said the BCI adding, “The Bar association should desist from taking such reckless and irresponsible decisions.”
The PHHCBA is a body of lawyers with around 4,000 members, who mainly practice in the high court. BCPH is a statutory body with over one lakh members in both the states and Chandigarh. The council regulates entry of lawyers into the legal profession including those practising in the high court.
