In a significant move that brought judicial work to a standstill, lawyers across Rajasthan abstained from court proceedings on Monday. The statewide boycott was a direct protest against a recent administrative decision to introduce working Saturdays in courts.
What Sparked the Protest?
The Rajasthan High Court advocates, along with lawyers practicing in subordinate courts, are up in arms against a directive that will make two Saturdays each month into working days. This new rule is slated to come into effect from January 26 this year. Choosing the first working day after the winter vacation for their protest, the legal fraternity ensured their dissent was loudly heard.
Court Proceedings Disrupted
The coordinated boycott had an immediate and visible impact on the functioning of the courts. In Jaipur, advocates stayed away from the courtrooms at the principal seat of the High Court. The situation was mirrored in Jodhpur, the other bench of the Rajasthan High Court.
While judges remained present on the benches, most of the listed cases could not proceed due to the absence of lawyers. Proceedings were largely paralyzed. However, exceptions were made for cases where litigants argued in person without legal representation. In the majority of other matters, adjournments were granted, pushing back hearings and causing delays in the justice delivery system.
Seeking a Resolution
The protest was not an isolated action but a coordinated effort by various bar associations. Representatives from all the protesting lawyer bodies have decided to escalate the matter. They are scheduled to hold a meeting with Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma in Jaipur on Tuesday. This dialogue is seen as a crucial step to resolve the impasse and address the grievances of the legal community regarding the new working schedule.
The lawyers' protest highlights the ongoing tension between judicial administration reforms and the working conditions of legal professionals. The outcome of Tuesday's meeting will be closely watched to see if a compromise can be reached or if the boycott will continue, potentially leading to further disruptions in the state's judicial calendar.
