Gujarat High Court Advocates' Association: A tale of Bar for and against the Bench

The Gujarat High Court Advocates Association (GHCAA) recently passed a resolution seeking the transfer of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal - not the first such act of defiance by lawyers in the western State.

In a landscape otherwise characterised by camaraderie between the Bar and the Bench, the Association has never hesitated to criticise the actions of the High Court's judges.

Unlike other Bar bodies, which largely shy away in matters which do not affect lawyers, the GHCAA has often involved itself in causes which affect individual judges or the society at large.

Standing up for judges

In July 2019, the GHCAA moved the Supreme Court through an Article 32 petition, taking objection to the Central government’s reluctance to appoint Justice Akil Kureshi, then a Gujarat High Court judge, as Chief Justice of the Madhya Pradesh High Court.

The GHCAA prayed that a direction be issued to the Central government to implement the Collegium resolution of May 10, 2019 and sign off on the appointment. The Bar body even got the legendary Senior Advocate Fali S Nariman to appear for them before the apex court.

The petition did not yield the desired result, since the Collegium later modified its decision and took a call to transfer him to the Tripura High Court instead.

Nevertheless, the GHCAA made a statement

Notably, this was not the first or last such instance.

In November 2022, a seven-member delegation representing the GHCAA met then Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud to urge him to reconsider the transfer of Justices Nikhil Kariel and Vipul Pancholi from the Gujarat High Court to the Patna High Court.

The GHCAA also went on an indefinite strike to protest the proposed transfer of Justice Kariel.

In 2017, GHCAA lawyers abstained from work in solidarity with Justice Jayant Patel who had resigned after he was slated to be transferred to the Allahabad High Court.

Justice Patel, whose parent High Court is Gujarat, was working as Karnataka High Court judge. He would have taken over as Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court if the seniority rule was followed. However, the Collegium recommended his transfer to the Allahabad High Court, where he would have served as a puisne judge.

He resigned before the transfer, but did not give any reasons for the same.

The GHCAA wasted no time in springing to the defence of the judge. It wrote letters to the Supreme Court and the High Courts of Karnataka and Allahabad seeking disclosure of the notes of recommendation made by the Collegium related to Patel J’s proposed transfer. In a bid to obtain some inkling of the Collegium’s workings, three separate letters were sent to the Registrars General of the three courts.

The letter to the Supreme Court Registrar General called for the notes of recommendation of all the Collegium members, as well as the notes of the Chief Justices of the High Courts of Karnataka and Allahabad regarding Justice Patel’s proposed transfer. The GHCAA also sought to know whether Justice Patel was consulted before his transfer, as is the practice, since it was his second transfer from one High Court to another.

Pertinently, in those letters, the GHCAA also sought information on two judges of the Gujarat High Court – Justices RP Dholaria and KJ Thaker – who were continuing as additional judges for four years without being made permanent. Further, the reasons for the non-transfer of the Delhi High Court’s Justice Valmiki Mehta and the Gujarat High Court’s MR Shah were also sought in the letter.

Echoing the past

The activism of GHCAA is not limited to recent times. In 1983, the Association protested the transfer of the late Justice PD Desai from Gujarat to the Himachal Pradesh High Court. That strike went on for more than two months, as per Deccan Herald.

Senior Advocate Sanjoy Ghose tweeted about how the Gujarat High Court bar was the first to stand up against the emergency imposed by the Central government in 1975.

The GHCAA's activism shows just how much power lawyers have in maintaining transparency and integrity in the judicial system. It also makes one wonder whether lawyers have a duty to protect the institution, and how far they should go to do so.

In an era often characterised by silence, one can argue that the activism by the Association is a breath of fresh air.