The statewide agitation by advocates against the Legal Aid Defence Counsel (LADC) policy will continue after talks between representatives of the Joint Action Committee (JAC) of Punjab Bar Association and judges of the Punjab and Haryana High Court failed to resolve the deadlock on Thursday.

According to District Bar Association Secretary Himanshu Walia, a JAC delegation met the high court judges in Chandigarh to resolve the impasse. During the meeting, the judges suggested that advocates first withdraw the ongoing strike, after which a meeting between Bar representatives and the Chief Justice of India (CJI) could be facilitated on Tuesday.

However, JAC rejected the proposal, stating that the strike could not be called off on mere verbal assurances. It said the agitation would be withdrawn only after receiving a concrete written assurance regarding their demands, particularly on the LADC policy. With no consensus reached, the talks remained inconclusive and the statewide agitation will continue.

“The Bar cannot withdraw the movement merely on verbal assurances. We have conveyed that the agitation will continue until we receive a written assurance addressing our concerns,” Walia said.

In Ludhiana, the relay hunger strike entered its third day at Chamber Complex near the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) Court. The accompanying ‘No Work’ call remained fully effective, severely affecting judicial functioning in district courts, with hearings in a large number of cases adjourned.

A large number of advocates assembled at the protest site, raised slogans against the LADC policy, and reiterated their resolve to continue the agitation. Lawyers said the movement would be intensified in the coming days if their demands were not addressed.

Bar leaders from across Punjab also met in Chandigarh on Thursday to deliberate on the future course of the agitation and chalk out the next phase of the statewide movement.

District Bar Association president Vipin Saggar and finance secretary Rachin Soni said the legal fraternity remained united and would continue the peaceful agitation until the authorities issued a written assurance on the issues raised by the Bar.

They maintained that the movement was aimed not only at protecting the interests and independence of the legal profession, but also at safeguarding the justice delivery system and ensuring that litigants continue to have access to effective legal representation.