- (1.) RAKESH Tiwari, J. Heard Sri Prakash Gupta for the petitioner and Sri V. K. Goel for the respondents.
(2.) THE writ petition was dismissed in default on 25-8-2006 as under : "the case has been taken up in the revised list. No one has appeared to press this petition. This is an old case. THE petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. " Sri Prakash Gupta, learned Counsel for the petitioner, states that he had written several letters to his client but he has not responded, as such he has not appeared before the Court. The cause of concern of the Court is that a tendency of the Counsel in not appearing before the Court without any reasonable cause and information is fast developing. If a Counsel is unable to appear for any reason whatsoever or that he is engaged in another Court, he may give; engagement slip to the reader of the Court as provided in High Court Rules and for any other just reason a mention may be made to the Court when the case is taken up. Non-appearance without any justifiable reason and non- information to the Court is a sheer deliberate discourtesy to the Court. This comes within the ambit of discourtesy.
(3.) A Counsel who is engaged in a case is duty bound to appear in the case for conducting the case. However, for seeking adjournment he should have this much courtesy to inform the Court for not being able to prosecute the same due to any difficulty which he may be facing including a situation where in spite of information his client has not responded or given any instructions. Once a Counsel chooses not to appeal before the Court, the Court can dismiss the writ petition in the revised list in the absence of the Counsel on the ground of non-prosecution. The present trend of not appearing before the Court without proper information is very discourteous and is a cause of concern to the Court. To accommodate the Counsel who has no courtesy to even inform the Court about his difficulty or the difficulty of his client does not deserve any sympathy. The Courts are already over- burdened with cases. Its function is to be streamlined, hence the Court is to be very strict in restoring even the dismissed in default cases.;