IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 23/04/2003
Coram
The Honourable Mr.B.SUBHASHAN REDDY, CHIEF JUSTICE
and
The Honourable Mr.Justice F.M.IBRAHIM KALIFULLA
Writ Petition No. 12555 of 2003
and
W.P.M.P.Nos.15749 & 15750 of 2003
Sundaradas .. Petitioner
-Vs-
Subordinate Judge
Kuzhithurai
Kanyakumari District .. Respondent
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorari as stated therein.
!For Petitioner .. Mr.K.Sreekumaran Nair
^For Respondent .. Mr.V.Raghupathy,
Govt.Pleader
:O R D E R
(The Order of the Court was made by The Hon’ble The Chief Justice)
This is a pro bono publico filed by the President of Kuzhithurai Bar
Association. He was also a former member of the State Legislative Assembly.
He is aggrieved by the notice of the Subordinate Judge, Kuzhithurai dated 20th
March 2003, which reads that Advocates’ boycott, which is going on, is
contrary to the judgment of the Supreme Court rendered in EX-CAPT.HARISH UPPAL
Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ANR (2003 I L.W (Crl.) page 82), and as such to avoid
inconvenience to the litigant public all plaint, written statement, vakalth
etc. shall be filed before him in the open Court itself daily by 11.00 a.m.
Hitherto, there was a box system, and that is dispensed with temporarily till
the boycott is withdrawn. This is only to facilitate the litigant public, who
are facing inconvenience because of the boycott call given by the advocates.
2. The petitioner, who is the President of the Kuzhithurai Bar Association,
is not able to persuade his voters/lawyers to withdraw the boycott. Boycott
is not only unprofessional, but is also unethical, and is expressly prohibited
by the judgment of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, which is the
law of the land, and which has been referred to by the Subordinate Judge in
the impugned notice. 3. We questioned the very locus of the petitioner to
maintain this writ petition and as to what is the interest he or the advocate
community has for the litigant public when they are boycotting the Courts. An
Advocate who boycotts the Court or the President of the Bar Association who
represents the Advocates boycotting the Courts, has got absolutely no locus to
file any writ petition of this sort, and in fact, filing of this writ petition
is an abuse of process of the Court and is deprecated. 4. This writ petition
is, therefore, dismissed with exemplary costs, to act as a deterrent,
quantified at Rs.25,000/- payable by the petitioner to the Member Secretary,
Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority within 15 days from to-day, failing
which, the Member Secretary, Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority, shall
take such steps as available under law for enforcement of the order of payment
of costs. No costs. Consequently, W.P.M.P.Nos.15749 & 15759 of 2003 are also
dismissed.
Index:Yes
pv
Copy to:
Subordinate Judge Kuzhithurai Kanyakumari District