Right To Peaceful Protest Is Fundamental, But Can't Block Access To Justice: P&H High Court To Lawyers Protesting LADC Scheme
The Punjab & Haryana High Court today orally said that right to peaceful protest is a fundamental right but lawyers protesting over Legal Aid Defence Counsel Scheme (LADC) cannot block access to justice.Acting Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor orally observed, “Access to justice cannot be blocked, peaceful protest doesn't mean you will deny the litigant to...
The Punjab & Haryana High Court today orally said that right to peaceful protest is a fundamental right but lawyers protesting over Legal Aid Defence Counsel Scheme (LADC) cannot block access to justice.
Acting Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor orally observed, “Access to justice cannot be blocked, peaceful protest doesn't mean you will deny the litigant to access court for 27 days.”
Justice Mishra said he understands the Bar's concern stating that, “I have also come from that side (bar)…being a judge is a temporary adoption, we always remain as a lawyer.”
Referring to LADC scheme the Court said it is a National Legal Services Authority initiative and judiciary has a limited role.
The bench further said that yesterday the Registrar General issued set of “recommendations to ensure better transparency and effective enforcement of the Legal Aid Defense Counsel System” and it hope and trusts the bar that it will resolve the issue.
These observations were made while hearing a Public Interest Litigation alleging denial of access to justice to litigants across Punjab on account of the ongoing strike by lawyers protesting against the Legal Aid LADC Scheme.
The matter is now adjourned to 30 July.
Previously, after hearing the President of the Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association, members of the Bar Council and senior advocates, the Court had expressed hope that the dispute would be resolved amicably without requiring judicial intervention.
The PIL has been filed by advocate Arvind Seth, a practising lawyer before the High Court, raising concerns over the disruption in the functioning of district courts across Punjab due to the ongoing strike by various lawyers' associations.
According to the petition, the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) introduced the Legal Aid Defence Counsel (LADC) System, which envisages an institutional mechanism for providing legal representation to persons entitled to legal aid. Following the introduction of the scheme, several bar associations in Punjab objected to it, contending that it adversely affected opportunities available to practising advocates under the earlier panel counsel system.
The petition states that, in protest against the scheme, several bar associations passed resolutions and called for an indefinite "no work" strike.
It is further averred that the ongoing strike has led to repeated delays in judicial proceedings in district courts across Punjab, thereby denying litigants access to justice.
Relying on settled law that advocates have neither a legal nor a fundamental right to strike or boycott courts, the petition argues that access to courts forms an essential component of the rule of law.
On this basis, the petitioner has sought directions to ensure the smooth functioning of all district courts in Punjab and to prevent any obstruction to judicial work.
Title: ARVIND SETH V/S STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS