No Access of Special Local Trains to Mumbai Lawyers: The State Disaster Management Authority Informed Bombay High Court

On 7^th Aug, 2020 the Disaster Management Authority informed the Bombay High Court that as per its Order dated 5 August, 2020 ; it addressed the representation that was made by the Bar and its members and decided that the Lawyers shall not have access to the’ Special Local Trains’ that are made for the people falling in the category of ‘ Essential Services’.

The Bombay High Court, comprising of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Madhav Jamdar in the case Chirag Chanani and Others v. Union of India and Anr., herd a plea seeking the inclusion of lawyers in the list of ‘Essential Services’ so that they can travel by the Special Local Trains. As per the Order of the Court, the Petitioner had the opportunity for filing the representation to the State in relation to this matter. The State Disaster Management Authority issued an Order stating that ‘ It is just not possible to accede to the requests made…. to permit lawyers and/or their employees/ personal staff, to travel by Mumbai Suburban Railway’.

The State Disaster Management Authority rejected the representation of the lawyers on the following grounds

• The restrictions in relation to the people who could travel by the local trains were imposed for ensuring the social distancing norms.
• Earlier the facility of the local trains was only available to the staff that was requisite for providing the essential services.
• The Bombay High Court in its Order dated 10^th July 2020 held that the lawyers are not covered within the ambit of essential services as per Section 2(a) of the Maharashtra Essential Services Maintenance Act, 2017.
• The State Legislature is empowered to include the services within the category of essential services.

On the issue that was raised by the lawyers that they are unable to reach the Court as the train services were shut, the Order stated that “ In none of the aforesaid representations any data is placed on record giving details of matters which got dismissed on account of non- the appearance of Advocate and/or on account of non- the appearance of Advocate any prejudice has been caused to any litigant. Not a single instance, there being none, has been mentioned where the absence of a lawyer has caused hindrance in the working of any Court proceedings thereof”.

• Many organizations have given applications seeking permission for traveling in the local trains,  they might be reasonable in their requests, but the state has not allowed any person from any of these organizations to presently travel by local train.
• In view of the above reasons, the Court allowed the Petitioner to make changes in their plea and therefore adjourn the matter.

Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com