J&K High Court quashes CAT order imposing ₹10,000 cost on senior advocate

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court recently quashed a Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) order imposing costs of ₹10,000 on Senior Advocate Jahangir Iqbal Ganai for appearing without uniform during virtual proceedings and allegedly making derogatory remarks "about the Court" [Jahangir Iqbal Ganai V/s Mohd Amin Dar and Others]

A bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice MA Chowdhary observed that the order was passed in a complete breach of the principles of natural justice.

“We have gone through the order impugned and find the same in complete breach of principles of natural justice in that a cost of Rs. 10,000/- has been imposed upon the learned Senior counsel without even affording him an opportunity of being heard and that too on a very small matter which ought to have been sorted out in the open Court,” the Court observed.

The Court passed the order on Ganai's writ petition challenging the order passed by the Jammu bench of CAT on October 07.

On October 13, the Court had expressed its desire to resolve the controversy through mediation and directed both members of the tribunal as well as the senior counsel to appear personally before it in chambers on October 21. 

However, when the matter was taken up on October 21, while Ganai was present, the tribunal members failed to appear before the Court despite repeated attempts. In the order passed later, the Court said,

"It seems that the Members of the Tribunal do not wish to cooperate." 

The Court observed that heated exchanges between the bar and the bench during arguments are not uncommon.

“However, the Bench should forebear from escalating it to the level of initiating contempt proceedings against the advocates or imposing costs on the person of the Advocates,“ the Court added.

It further said that had the tribunal members displayed restraint and maturity, the unpleasant situation leading to the issuance of a contempt notice against the senior advocate could have been avoided.

At the same time, the Court emphasized that advocates, particularly senior advocates, have a higher responsibility to maintain the dignity and decorum of the Court.

They must ensure that minor differences in perception do not escalate into an unpleasant atmosphere of driving a wedge between the bar and the bench, it added.

“Without saying much in the matter, we wish to close the matter here only,” the bench said, while quashing the tribunal order.

[Read Order]