FC assurance means keeping in abeyance disciplinary rules: HC

The Madras High Court today held that there was no need for an order to keep in abeyance the recently notified disciplinary rules, over which lawyers have been agitating, in view of the Full Court's assurance of no action against them till the rules were reviewed.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice R Mahadevan made the observation during the hearing of a miscellaneous petition by advocate Kasiramalingam seeking to keep the the amended rules in abeyance till CCTV cameras were installed in all the courts.
The petition came up for hearing a day after the advocates intensified their more than two-month-long agitation against the rules and virtually laid a siege to the high court campus.

The bench said the June 17 last resolution passed by the Full Court and subsequent clarification on the matter itself meant keeping the rules in abeyance.
The Full Court meeting had reiterated an assurance of Justice Kaul to the Bar Council and Bar Associations that pending examination of the amendments to the Advocates' Act, no precipitative action will be taken against lawyers.
"Your apprehension is that the action will be initiated under the rules... When the Full Court passed a resolution that no action will be taken under the amended rules, that itself means nothing but keeping in abeyance and there is no need for a separate order to be passed again," it said.

Pointing out again that the rules were framed only on the basis of a Supreme Court order, the Chief Justice said, "The rules were not brought suddenly and if the apex court had stated that the high court need not make amendments, I may not have done it."
He further said when representatives of various bar associations and Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry approached the court and expressed their apprehension, they were advised to make a representation to the Rules Committee, formed to look into their objections. But unfortunately, this did not happen, Justice Kaul said.
The Chief Justice suggested that the lawyers place their case before the Rules Committee.