Delhi High Court Bar Association Calls Work Abstention Over Mandatory Saturday Sittings

According to a notice dated April 2 issued by the DHCBA, the Executive Committee, in its meeting held on March 27, unanimously decided to take this step in response to the Delhi High Court's notification mandating sittings on the 1st and 3rd Saturdays. The resolution underscores growing dissatisfaction among members over the administrative directive.

The Bar Association noted that multiple representations had already been made to the High Court seeking reconsideration of this decision. However, as no change has been made so far, the Committee proceeded with the resolution to abstain from work, signaling a firm institutional stance.

The notice highlights that members of the Bar have raised serious practical difficulties arising from Saturday sittings. Lawyers pointed out that such a schedule would disrupt their professional commitments, including appearances before tribunals, arbitrations, mediation proceedings, and courts outside Delhi. Additionally, concerns were expressed about reduced preparation time, impact on client meetings, and overall professional efficiency, intensifying the opposition.

In light of these issues, the DHCBA has urged all its members to cooperate with the decision and abstain from work on the designated Saturdays, starting from April 4. The Association also stated that proxy counsels will be arranged for each court on these days to ensure minimal d

isruption in proceedings, reflecting an effort to balance protest with procedural continuity.

At the same time, the Executive Committee reiterated its request to the Delhi High Court to reconsider the decision mandating Saturday sittings. It expressed hope that the concerns of the Bar would receive due consideration and that an appropriate resolution would be reached in the interest of the legal community.

The notice has been issued under the signature of DHCBA President N Hariharan and Honorary Secretary Vikram Singh Panwar, marking a significant moment in the ongoing tension between the Bar and the Bench over court scheduling policies.