Madhya Pradesh High Court (file photo) – Photo: Amar Ujala Expansion Taking suo motu cognizance of the strike by the lawyers in the state, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has ordered them to return to work immediately. Citing the earlier orders passed by the Supreme Court and the High Court, a division bench of Chief Justice Ravi Malimath and Justice Vishal Mishra said that if advocates do not return to work, it would be considered contempt of court. The High Court has also said that contempt action will be taken against the advocates who do not comply with the order and they will be expelled. The High Court directed the registry to issue notices along with a copy of the order to the Chairman of the State Bar Council, the President of the High Court Bar Association Jabalpur, Indore and Gwalior, the President of the High Court Advocates Bar Association Jabalpur and the Presidents of the District Bar Association across the state. . The Jugalpeeth said in its order that we are extremely shocked, worried and saddened by the way things have come to light. . The reply was given after receiving the letter from the State Bar and told the Chairman and members of the State Bar that the issues have been placed before the Chief Justice for consideration. 233 The order for disposal of cases was postponed for three months. Instead of doing so, the SBA chairman announced a statewide strike through the same notification e-mail. Apart from this, the Chairman of the Bar Council of India has also written a letter to the Chairman of the State Bar on March calling off the immediate strike. Instructions were given, which were not even followed. Not only this, the court said that the interests of the parties are getting affected. Jugalpeeth, citing the order passed by the Supreme Court in the Harish Uppal case, said that advocates cannot go on strike . Even before this, decisions were taken in the past regarding the issue of strike, on which undertaking was also given. Taking suo motu cognizance, the High Court gave the above instructions in the public interest and the interest of the parties. The High Court has directed the registry to inform the court after obtaining information regarding the advocates who are not present for the hearing despite the order. ,