Amit Verma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 4962 MP

                                   1
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                         AT JABALPUR
                              RP No. 91 of 2023
              (AMIT VERMA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

Dated : 27-03-2023
      Shri Bramhadatt Singh - Government Advocate for respondents.

Petitioner's counsel is absent.

Petitioner - Shri Amit Verma is present in the Court. He submits that his lawyers have not attended the Court because they are on strike. He further submits that he had engaged Ms.Sudha Gautam as Advocate to appear on his

behalf in Writ Petition No.18768 of 2021. Thereafter, he was informed by her that the writ petition has been dismissed and a writ appeal has to be filed. She assured him that she would be filing the writ appeal .

We have considered the order dated 22.08.2022 passed by this Court in Writ Appeal No.962 of 2022. The name of Shri R.B.Tiwari - Advocate is shown in the final judgment. We have considered the Vakalat filed in Writ Appeal No.962 of 2022 which is before us. It contains the names of Shri R.B.Tiwari, Smt. Sonali Paroche, Shri Deepak Kumar Pandey and Shri Rajesh Ku. Varma as Advocates. Their names are not shown as counsels appearing in

the Review Petition. The Review Petition has been filed which contains the Vakalat of Shri Pradeep Kumar Sharma and Shri D.N.Pandey as counsels. Therefore, the petitioner submits that by the next date he will be making further submissions or his lawyers may appear.

In view of the same, call after eight weeks.

Shri Bramhadatt Singh - Government Advocate is present in the court and appears for respondents No.1 to 3.

In terms of the order dated 24.03.2023 passed in W.P. No.7295 of 2023

(In Reference (Suo Moto) vs. Chairman, State Bar council of M.P. and others), all the advocates were directed to attend their court work forthwith. In spite of the same, there were certain advocates who appeared on 25.03.2023 and certain who did not.

In view of the fact that there may be a possibility that each and every advocate may not be aware of the order passed on 24.03.2023, they were extended the benefit of doubt so far as 25.03.2023 is concerned. On behalf of petitioner, Shri Pradeep Kumar Sharma and Shri D.N.Pandey, Advocates have entered Vakalat. However, learned counsels for the petitioner are deliberately absent today.

Hence, issue a show cause notice against them as to why proceedings for contempt should not be initiated for disobeying the order dated 24.03.2023 passed in W.P. No.7295 of 2023 and to submit reply by 10.04.2023.

      (RAVI MALIMATH)                                      (VISHAL MISHRA)
        CHIEF JUSTICE                                           JUDGE

C




Digitally signed by
CHRISTOPHER PHILIP
Date: 2023.03.28
13:31:15 +05'30'