Bail Applicant Under Mandatory Obligation To Disclose Criminal Antecedents, Non-Disclosure Results In Erroneous Decisions: Andhra Pradesh High Court Judicial Decrees Cannot Be Set Aside By Administrative Orders After Decades; Long-Standing Revenue Entries Must Be Protected: Allahabad High Court 'Any Use Whatsoever' Includes Promotion & Events: Bombay High Court Restrains New Indian Express Group From Hosting Commercial Events Outside Southern States Reserved Category Candidates Who Qualify On Their Own Seniority Must Be Adjusted Against Unreserved Vacancies: Calcutta High Court Decree For Possession Can Be Passed If Landlord-Tenant Relationship & Termination Are Admitted; Unregistered Lease Is Month-To-Month: Delhi High Court Prosecution Against Co-Accused Not Sustainable When Main Accused Is Discharged On Same Facts: Jharkhand High Court Admission Of Handwriting On Account Statement Is Not Admission Of Its Contents; Corroborative Evidence Necessary To Prove Claim: Gujarat High Court Omission Of Label Defects In Food Inspector's Spot Memo Fatal To Prosecution For Misbranding: Himachal Pradesh High Court RBI Must Consult State Government, Not Just Registrar, To Supersede Co-operative Bank Board; Principles Of Natural Justice Excluded Under Section 36AAA: Kerala High Court Suit Filed Before IBC Proceedings Cannot Be Dismissed Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC; Section 96 Moratorium Only Stays Pending Actions: Calcutta High Court Senior Citizens Not Technologically Savvy Cannot Be Penalized For Not Checking Case Status On Court Website: Tripura High Court Telangana High Court Quashes Case Against CM Revanth Reddy Over 2019 Election Roadshow, Cites Bar Under Section 195 CrPC Maintenance Tribunal Orders Passed Without Mandated Three-Member Coram Are A Nullity: Punjab & Haryana High Court School Register Entry Regarding Date Of Birth Lacks Probative Value Unless Source Of Information Is Proved: Madhya Pradesh High Court Sets Aside POCSO Conviction Limitation Period For Specific Performance Starts From Date Of Refusal If No Fixed Date Stipulated In Agreement: Karnataka High Court Pensionary Benefits Not ‘Pecuniary Advantage’, Cannot Be Deducted From Income For Motor Accident Compensation: Punjab & Haryana High Court Will | Disinheriting Caring Spouse In Favour Of Non-Relatives Is An ‘Unnatural Disposition’ Raising Grave Suspicion: Supreme Court Registration Does Not Automatically Validate Will If Process Is Shrouded In Suspicion; Testator's Illiteracy Increases Burden On Propounder: Supreme Court Propounder Faces Heavy Burden Of Proof When Testator Is Illiterate; Registration Does Not Cure Unexplained Suspicious Circumstances: Supreme Court

Supreme Court provides mechanism for redressal of grievances of Advocates/Bar Associations

06 October 2025 12:01 PM

By: Admin


In a significant judgement on April 20, 2023, the Supreme Court of India has directed the constitution of Grievance Redressal Committees (GRC) at different levels for redressal of grievances of Advocates/Bar Associations. The application had been filed by the Bar Council of India, which suggested various measures for controlling illegal and unreasonable strikes and boycotts by the advocates. The Council also proposed a mechanism for redressal of grievances of Advocates/Bar Associations at all levels.

Shri Manan Kumar Mishra, learned Senior Advocate and Chairman of the Bar Council of India, submitted that the Bar Council is of the firm view and opinion that the illegal and unreasonable strikes and boycott are always bad and the Bar Councils can never approve or encourage such practices. However, the Bar Council of India and all the representatives of the lawyers were of the unanimous opinion that there should be a grievance redressal mechanism available to Advocates at all levels from the Talukas/Muffasils/District Courts, High Courts where the members of the Bar could vent their grievances.

The Supreme Court, while hearing the application, reiterated that no member of the Bar can go on strike and/or abstain himself from court working. The Court emphasized that if the member of the Bar has any genuine grievance or difficulty being faced, they can make a representation and it is appropriate that their genuine grievances are considered by some forum so that such strikes can be avoided.

Supreme Court directed all the High Courts to constitute Grievance Redressal Committee in their respective High Courts which may be headed by the Chief Justice and such a grievance redressal committee be consisting of two other senior Judges, one each from service and one from the Bar to be nominated by the Chief Justice as well as the Advocate General, Chairman of the Bar Council of the State and President of the High Court Bar Association. The High Court may also consider to constitute the similar Grievance Redressal Committee at the District Court level.

The Court observed that the Grievance Redressal Committee may consider the genuine grievance related to the difference of opinion or dissatisfaction because of procedural changes in filing/listing of the matters of the respective High Courts or any District Courts in their respective States and any genuine grievance pertaining to misbehave of any member of the lower judiciary, provided such grievance must be genuine and not to keep the pressure on any judicial officer.

The Registry has been directed to send the copies of this order to Registrar General of all the High Courts for further steps in terms of the present order. This judgement is likely to have a significant impact on the functioning of the judiciary in India, as it seeks to provide a mechanism for redressal of grievances of Advocates/Bar Associations and reduce the incidents of strikes and boycotts.

District Bar Association Dehradun Vs Ishwar Shandilya & Ors.

Latest Legal News