The Gujarat High Court Today (Aug 12) criticised a lawyer for not attending a single hearing in a pension case since 2024, leading to 30 adjournments. Justice Nikhil S Kariel questioned why such conduct should not be reported to the Bar Council.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Ahmedabad: The Gujarat High Court on Tuesday came down heavily on a lawyer who had not appeared even once in a pension case filed in 2024, despite the matter being adjourned thirty times.
The case was filed on behalf of an 82-year-old man seeking his pension.
Justice Nikhil S Kariel expressed serious displeasure over the repeated non-appearance and remarked:
“Yes sir, what do I do for you? Shall I change the premises of the High Court? where it will be convenient to you? How many times the matter has been adjourned? 30 times. Filed in the year 2024; thirty times the matter has been adjourned.”
The Court went on to question why this behaviour should not be taken up with the Bar Council:
“Somebody has come to you believing that you have filed a petition for him for his pension. Good or bad or otherwise. You for thirty times don’t come to the High Court when the matter is called up. Why should I not refer to this conduct to the Bar Council? Thirty times the matter is adjourned mister.”
Justice Kariel reminded that on June 25 he had already given a “final chance” for the lawyer to appear. But even after that order, the case was adjourned four more times without the lawyer showing up.
He warned that advocates should not take cases if they cannot honour the trust placed by their clients:
“Don’t do that. Don’t give us, entire system a bad name. Thirty times the matter is adjourned with the learned advocate not appearing for one time. On July 25, I passed an order and I say that ‘It has been filed in the month of January, twenty-seven times it has been adjourned’. There are orders which show that the learned advocates have not appeared and as a last chance I keep it on July 2. From then till today, three times the matter was adjourned. If you can’t appear in matters, why do you take it up? don’t take the matters.”
The judge also pointed out that the petitioner, an elderly man of 82 years, claimed he had not received his pension. He observed that, ironically, after long delays caused by the lawyer, the matter would later be mentioned in another court seeking priority hearing due to the petitioner’s age, as if the court was responsible for the delay.
Justice Kariel further observed that given the passage of over 50 years, it was unrealistic to expect that the concerned government department would still have the necessary records to process such a claim.
He asked tough questions:
“Have you ever approached the department? When did you approach? 49 years and what did the department replied? Naturally after 49 years what will be available with the department?. Forget the earlier bench, you don’t appear before the bench. What additional papers would he have after 51 years? I will not ask them to answer this. After 50 years why should the department do all the running around for you? There has to be some limit…naturally how can they reply after 49 years? Your client does not have papers, what papers will they provide after half century? If you wake up after half a century, filing such petitions and then not coming to Court.”
The Court has now posted the matter for hearing again on August 13.
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on CJI BR Gavai
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Pension Case
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
