Harish Salve tells Supreme Court adjournment was taken in his name without his knowledge

Senior Counsel Harish Salve informed the Supreme Court on Thursday that an adjournment was taken on his behalf in a case on Wednesday without his knowledge..Senior Advocate Aparajita Singh on behalf of Salve told the Bench of Justices AS Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan that this was not the first such instance, and it has happened in the past as well."Mr. Salve has requested me to apprise your lordships that he had not been informed about it at all! This is very unfair to your lordships and this is unfair to the counsel. He has not been informed at all and this is not the first occasion," Singh told the Bench.On Wednesday, the Bench had taken exception after a lawyer appearing in a matter sought adjournment saying that Salve, who was slated to appear in the matter, could not be present. The Court had then rebuked the lawyer saying the practice of taking the name of Senior Advocates to seek adjournment was on the rise. .After Singh today said that Salve was not kept in the loop about such adjournment, the Bench made it clear that it was not on individual advocates."We are not on individual persons. It is very unfair. This is not the first time. Other day, in earlier combination it was mentioned and said that office of the Senior Advocate (Salve) was consulted and he wants the case to be listed on a particular date," the Bench remarked today.."I am from Mr. Salve's chamber and one thing we were taught repeatedly was never take the court for granted. That it is your temple, that is where you have to appear and that is where you have to bow down. There are people who are doing things in his (Salve's) name and he is aggrieved that he does not even get to know about it and people go and mention on his behalf," Singh said.She further stated that even the concerned advocate-on-record had no idea that the matter was being mentioned in Salve's name."But somebody has to take responsibility," Justice Oka said.The judge also said there would be no harm if apology is tendered to the Court by lawyers."You may not like judges but there is no harm in apologizing to the institution. You may not like an individual judge but even that remorse is not shown by junior members of the bar! That will be harmful to them in the future. the apology has to be to the institution and not to the individual judges. And even that practice has disappeared with the passage of time because perhaps the junior members of the bar are in the impression that judges may come here stay for few years and go away," Justice Oka remarked..The counsel who had sought adjournment on Wednesday, then appeared and said that she had raised the request on instructions by the client."My Lord, I had made that request yesterday because my client has instructed me to say this. Mr. Salve had appeared in this matter so I had no reason to disbelieve that he had not spoken to the client," the lawyer said. "The client is always directly in touch with the office of Mr. Salve. So we had no reason to disbelieve. We deeply apologise for the miscommunication, even to Mr. Salve," the lawyer said."Alright. It's done now," Justice Oka said, putting the issue to rest.. [Read Live Coverage]