Dhanbad Bar Association vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors.

Per M. S. Sonak, C.J.

The present writ petition has been filed in public interest by the petitioner, the Dhanbad Bar Association, seeking appropriate directions upon the respondents to restore the access corridors and emergency exits of the Bar Association Building, remove the illegal obstructions erected at the Justice S.B. Sinha Dwar, reopen the western gates, and provide adequate parking facilities for the advocate members of the Association.

We have heard Mr Shailesh Kumar, along with Mr Abhijeet Kumar Singh, for the petitioner, and Mr Vibhor Mayank, learned A.C. to A.G., for the respondents.

Following the admission of the writ petition, the matter was listed on several occasions before this Court. We must record that none of the parties or their respective Counsel treated this matter as adversarial. All the stakeholders and their Counsel approached the matter with a view to finding a practical solution rather than insisting upon rights and corresponding duties. The Petitioner and its members assured the Court that they would not resort to extrajudicial means like strikes, etc., and the Administration also assured the Court that all reasonable and possible steps would be taken to address the issue.

We proceed to briefly outline the intermediate directions issued and the progress recorded during the pendency of these proceedings.

By order dated 12.03.2026, this Court noted the petitioner’s submission that the parking dispute was non-adversarial and suitable for amicable resolution. Observing that such matters ought to be resolved through dialogue, this Court requested the Principal District Judge, Dhanbad, to convene a joint stakeholder meeting with the District Administration and the Bar.

Thereafter, in pursuance of the Court’s directions, stakeholder meetings were held on 28.03.2026 and 11.04.2026. The said meetings culminated in a resolution to execute a short-term parking plan by 21.04.2026. On the next date of hearing, i.e. on 23.04.2026, upon noticing that the stipulated deadline had lapsed, this Court granted a further fifteen days for implementation and called for a tentative timeline regarding long-term measures.

Progressing further, by order dated 14.05.2026, this Court recorded substantial compliance of the short-term solution, as vendors were relocated and traffic constables were deployed. However, with respect to the long-term plan, which remains contingent upon the relocation of the adjacent jail, the Respondents undertook to furnish a time schedule, an undertaking reiterated in the order dated 25.06.2026, whereby this Court directed that a fresh stakeholder meeting be convened to finalise the details.

In compliance with the said direction, a meeting was convened on 09.07.2026, attended by the Principal District Judge, Dhanbad, the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad, the Superintendent of Police (City), Dhanbad, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the office bearers of the petitioner-Association. As borne out by the counter affidavit filed by the Principal District Judge, Dhanbad, the meeting concluded on a note of consensus, and an interim arrangement has since been given effect to.

In terms of the said arrangement, sufficient parking space stands created for the vehicles of advocates and litigants, the daily vendors having been shifted to the designated vending zone, with police personnel deployed to ensure that the space so earmarked is not re-occupied. Insofar as the immediate grievance regarding parking is concerned, this Court finds the same to have been substantially redressed.

As regards the long-term solution, the stakeholders have arrived at an understanding that the jail presently situated in front of the Court complex would, in due course, be relocated to the outskirts of the city, thereby freeing the land in question for the enduring resolution of the space constraints faced by the Bar.

It has, however, been fairly represented to us that the implementation of this proposal is contingent upon the approval of the State Government and would accordingly require time. This is quite reasonable because such matters need to be sorted out keeping in mind the interests of all stakeholders and not just the bar members or the litigants.

There is demand upon scarce resources like parking places and the State Administration must accommodate such demands equitably. We are happy to note that all the parties approached the matter through this perspective, thereby facilitating a reasonable resolution.

While the fruition of the long-term proposal thus lies beyond the immediate reach of the local administration, this Court records its expectation that the assurances held out shall not remain unfulfilled, and that the matter shall be pursued with the seriousness it deserves.

This Court places on record its appreciation of the spirit of accommodation and cooperation exhibited throughout by the District Administration, the police, the officers of the District Judiciary, and particularly the members of the Dhanbad Bar Association, whose restraint through the course of these proceedings reflects well upon the profession.

We also place on record our sincere appreciation for the efforts of Mr Shailesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, whose constructive and non-adversarial approach materially facilitated the resolution arrived at. We also appreciate the approach of the State Administration and its Counsel in resolving this issue.

In view of the foregoing, and the immediate grievances having been substantially redressed through dialogue rather than adjudication, we find nothing further surviving for determination in the present proceedings. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending I.As., if any, will not survive and are disposed of.