38.6c New Delhi, India, Monday, May 20, 2024
Legal Insiders

DHCBA President Mohit Mathur Talks About Protests Against Justice Murlidhar's Transfer To P&H HC [Watch Interview]

By LawStreet News Network      23 February, 2020 03:02 PM      0 Comments
DHCBA President Mohit Mathur Justice Murlidhar

On the 20th of February, in the Delhi High Court, it was seen that only urgent business was being conducted while most lawyers were abstaining from work in response to a call for protests given by the Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA). The lawyers were seen protesting against the transfer of Justice S. Muralidhar, the third most senior judge in the Court to the Punjab and Haryana High Court (P&H HC). The Bar put forth the contention that such transfers via the collegium are not only detrimental to the noble institution but it further tends to erode and dislodge the faith of the litigants in the justice system. A fair delivery of justice is also impeded.

With regard to the above matter, answering questions on issues at hand, the President of the Delhi High Court Bar Association, Mohit Mathur in conversation with LawStreet Journal Editor Kshipra Srivastava:

LawStreet Journal:Transfers are a part and parcel of the Indian Judicial System. Then why do you think that the transfer of Justice Murlidhar from Delhi to Punjab & Haryana High Court is problematic?

Mohit Mathur: We are being misconstrued by everyone. There is no denying, transfer is the power vested with the collegium, to transfer any of these judges and even the constitution permits it from one High Court to another, neither do we say it is problematic. We have actually protested because the sentiment of the bar was that the Bar Association and the members of the bar who are primary stakeholders in any judicial system should have also been consulted where we could have expressed our views why a particular judge should or should not be transferred. So it is not a case or a situation where this protest is for an individual. Yes, no doubt he is one of the finest judges we have had in this High Court but moreover it is on the principle which is the issue today. The stakeholders should be taken in the loop while you are taking such an important decision of a judge who has been with the High Court, who has endeared himself to the lawyers, has encouraged the juniors, is a relief giving judge. Yes, those factors definitely weigh in the mind of the lawyers but more than that, it is the Supreme Court collegium that should have taken into account or kept the lawyers in the loop in the sense that the Bar Association views could have been taken and considered, the power of the pen is already with them.

LawStreet Journal:Is this the first time that Delhi High Court Bar Association has organised a protest?

Mohit Mathur:No, this is not the first time, it has happened before, when there is an attack on the judiciary in any manner, the bar associations all over the country have stood up. Even in this very High court, I am reminded of an incident in the 1980's where one of our judges, Justice T P S Chawla was not being considered for the appointment as the Chief justice of the High Court. The bar association took up the issue, and protested, the protest went on for days and the government paid heed to it, considered it and consulted the stakeholders, after which it appointed Justice Chawla as the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court. So it is not something which is new.

LawStreet Journal:Has the Collegium acted outside the purview of its powers given by law?

Mohit Mathur:I won't say that, the collegium definitely has power and the collegium is the creation of a judgement of the Supreme Court wherein the court was developing the process for appointment of judges in the higher judiciary - in the HC and SC, which is why the collegium was set up. They have the powers and wisdom. Our protest is that, it is not an individual which is the issue, but the principle of involving the stakeholders.


LawStreet Journal:Is Justice Murlidhar aware of the ongoing protest?

Mohit Mathur:Justice Murlidhar was infact very candid and categoric that he wanted no protest to be lodged. His views were expressed in front of the entire executive committee. But the sentiments of the general members of the bar, we are around 20,000 members strong bar and the general sentiment of the bar was to lodge a protest and communicate the protest that the stakeholders should have been kept in the loop.

LawStreet Journal:If Justice Murlidhar is an asset for Delhi's Judiciary, why should P&H High Court not get the honor of working with him?

Mohit Mathur:They might definitely get the benefit of his indulgences because he is very good and encouraging. I am sure wherever he goes, he will be an asset. But I am sure you will appreciate and everybody will appreciate that why should I lose an asset for somebody else to gain an asset?

Author - Dyuti Pandya

Share this article:

User Avatar

Leave a feedback about this

Trending Judiciary
Supreme Court refuses to entertain plea for stay on new criminal laws

SC refuses plea to stay new criminal laws. Court deems the plea casual, noting laws aren't yet implemented. Petitioner withdraws. Laws effective from July 1, 2024.

20 May, 2024 12:58 PM
Trending Know The Law
SCBA Election Result 2024, Know the newly elected members

SCBA Election Result 2024: Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal elected President. Know the newly elected members and key office bearers leading the Supreme Court Bar Association.

20 May, 2024 03:03 PM


Trending Judiciary
SC Issues Notice to ED on Hemant Soren's Plea Against Arrest in Land Scam

Supreme Court issues notice to ED on Hemant Soren's plea against arrest in a land scam case, sets hearing for May 17 after senior advocate Kapil Sibal's request for an earlier date.

14 May, 2024 11:24 AM
Trending Environment
3,800 metric tonnes of solid wastes going untreated everyday in Delhi SC records concern

The Supreme Court expressed concern as 3,800 metric tonnes of solid waste in Delhi go untreated daily. The issue must be addressed promptly beyond political lines.

14 May, 2024 11:30 AM
Trending Judiciary
Plea filed in SC for review of April 26 EVM VVPAT verdict

A plea has been filed in the Supreme Court to review its April 26 verdict on EVM VVPAT verification, challenging the decision that dismissed a demand for 100% vote cross-verification.

14 May, 2024 12:13 PM
Trending Judiciary
AI can’t detect consent Microsoft and Google tell Delhi High Court

Microsoft and Google tell Delhi HC that AI can't detect consent for NCII takedowns, challenging a 24-hour removal directive under IT Act's safe harbour protections.

14 May, 2024 01:33 PM


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email