Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Shri Umesh Kumar Rahangdale vs M.P. State Cooperative Bank Ltd. on 28 March, 2023

Author: Vivek Agarwal

Bench: Vivek Agarwal

                                                             1
                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT JABALPUR
                                                      WP No. 3459 of 2021
                           (SHRI UMESH KUMAR RAHANGDALE AND OTHERS Vs M.P. STATE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. AND
                                                             OTHERS)

                         Dated : 28-03-2023
                               Lawyers are abstaining from work.

                               None for the petitioners.
                               None for the respondent No.1.

Shri Manas Mani Verma - Govenrment Advocate for respondent Nos.2&3.

There is no representation on behalf of the petitioners as well as the private respondent(s) and this is direct violation of the order(s) passed by Hon'ble the Division Bench of this Court on 24.3.2023 in Writ Petition No.7295/2023 (In Reference (Suo Motu) versus Chairman, State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh and Others) wherein following directions have been issued to the Members of the Bar Association:-

''(i) All the advocates throughout the State of Madhya Pradesh are hereby directed to attend to their court work forthwith. They shall represent their clients in the respective cases before the respective courts forthwith;

(ii) If any lawyer deliberately avoids to attend the court, it shall be presumed that there is disobedience of this order and he will be faced with serious consequences including initiation of proceedings for contempt of court under the Contempt of Courts Act;

(iii) If any lawyer prevents any other lawyer from attending the court work, the same would be considered as disobedience of these directions and he will be faced with serious consequences including initiation of proceedings under Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time: 3/28/2023 7:14:56 PM 2 the Contempt of Courts Act;

(iv) Each of the judicial officers are directed to submit a report as to which lawyer has deliberately abstained from attending the court;

(v) The judicial officers shall also mention the names of advocates who have prevented other advocates from entering the court premises or from conducting their cases in the court;

(vi) Such advocates shall be dealt with seriously which may even include proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act as well as being debarred from practice.'' A s nobody is appearing for the petitioners as well as the private respondent(s), issue notice against Shri Suyash Thakur, Shri Rohan Harne, Shri Sanjay Kumar Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Shri Devendra Kumar Prajapati, Shri Durgesh Pandey, Shri Shankar Dayal Shukla, Ms.Shruti Singh Chouhan, Shri Suyash Mohan Guru, learned counsel for the respondent(s) to show cause as to why the contempt proceedings be not initiated against them for deliberate and willful non-compliance of the order(s) of Hon'ble the Division Bench of this Court dated 24.3.2023 passed in Writ Petition No.7295/2023 (In Reference (Suo Motu) versus Chairman, State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh and Others) for which the Office is directed to take steps within seven working days by ordinary mode as well as by registered A/D post.

Reply of the respondent No.1 is available on record whereas the petitioners have raised a grievance in relation to the acts of the respondent No.2. Reply of respondent No.2 is not available on record.

Let reply of respondent No.2 be positively filed within eight weeks. Petition is admitted for final hearing.

List this case for final hearing in Part-II of the Cause List as per its turn & seniority under appropriate head.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE amit Signature Not Verified Signed by: AMIT JAIN Signing time: 3/28/2023 7:14:56 PM