Lucknow lawyers protest demolition of over 200 chambers

• Lawyers in Lucknow stage a sit-in against the demolition of over 200 chambers following a high court order, demanding alternative accommodation

• Advocate Balram Jakhar alleges arbitrary action by authorities, saying at least 2,000 advocates are affected and vowing to resist the demolition

• The protesting lawyers acknowledge the court order but insist that alternative arrangements should be made to protect their livelihoods and legal practice

Several advocates staged a sit-in on a road in Lucknow on Sunday to protest the demolition of more than 200 lawyers’ chambers by the city’s Municipal Corporation following a high court order. The protesting lawyers demanded alternative accommodation to continue their legal practice before the demolition proceeded.

Police and administrative officials arrived at the site on Sunday to carry out the demolition, prompting strong objections from the advocates. The lawyers blocked the road and launched a sit-in, opposing the action and alleging that the authorities had failed to make adequate arrangements for those affected.

Speaking to IANS, advocate Balram Jakhar accused the administration of acting arbitrarily and demanded that alternative facilities be provided before the chambers were demolished.

“They are acting arbitrarily. First, provide us with an alternative arrangement, and then demolish the chambers,” Jakhar said, adding that at least 2,000 advocates were affected by the move.

Referring to the timing of the action ahead of Diwali, he expressed frustration over the uncertainty surrounding the lawyers’ professional future.

“Diwali is such a major festival, yet we are being left in darkness. How can this government function like this?” he said, alleging that the chambers were being taken away without adequate consideration for the lawyers’ livelihoods.

Jakhar alleged that the authorities were prioritising the demolition without making sufficient efforts to arrange alternative spaces for the affected advocates.

“They are only after demolishing the chambers and are not making efforts in providing us an alternative,” he said, warning that the lawyers would continue to resist the move.

He further asserted that the protesting advocates would not allow the demolition to proceed without their demands being addressed.

“We will do whatever it takes to stop this,” he said.

The advocate also alleged that police and administrative officials were attempting to remove the protesters from the site and suppress their opposition.

“If they demolish our chambers, we will have to practise on the roads, so we have already taken it to the streets,” Jakhar said.

While acknowledging that the demolition was being carried out pursuant to a high court order, Jakhar said the authorities should have explored alternatives to minimise the impact on the legal community.

“We respect the court orders, but there should have been a way out,” he said.

He maintained that lawyers should not be subjected to such treatment and emphasised their role in ensuring access to justice.

“There is complete arbitrariness, and no one is willing to hear us out. We are lawyers, not goons or mafias, who can be subjected to such torture. We are an important section of society who ensure justice for people,” he said.

The protest has highlighted concerns among the affected advocates over the loss of their workplaces and the absence of alternative arrangements. The lawyers have called on the authorities to address their concerns as the dispute over the demolition continues.

The latest incident comes amid previous controversy in Uttar Pradesh over the demolition of a mosque allegedly constructed illegally within the Saharanpur Collectorate complex.

The mosque was demolished after a court rejected an appeal filed by the Muslim side, according to the report.

Both incidents have brought attention to disputes over the removal of structures following legal orders and the concerns raised by those directly affected by such actions.

With IANS inputs