He was not the only president in question. Even the President of India was very much in the scheme of things for it was his proposed visit that is delaying the speedbreaker from coming up before the district court building. It was precisely that bump, or rather the demand for one to check speedsters, that had Bar president Ashit Mehta in a soup.

After a woman lawyer was knocked down by a speeding vehicle before the court building, the association took to the streets demanding a speedbreaker at that particular point to prevent future accidents. The civic authorities said there was no point in building a bump since it would be flattened out before the presidential visit. The bar association was, however, assured that the speedbreaker would be built the moment the visit ended.

The bar president, after getting an assurance, decided to call the general body meeting to decide the fate of the three-week old strike early this month. He pointed out to the bar members that a speedbreaker was too trivial a reason to continue the strike so long. However, his stand was not shared by some advocates, who felt that the speedbreaker would never come up and cited past civic assurances to buttress their argument that authorities don't keep their word.

A queer thing happened in the June 8 general body meeting attended by more than 150 lawyers. When asked how many were against continuation of the strike, only three raised their hands. When asked whether the stir should continue, 10 people raised their hands. The others remained non-committal.Those in favour of strike were shocked to learn when they went through the minutes, which read the strike was called off by a majority. The pro-strike lobby felt shortchanged and took Mehta to task. Mehta's explanation was since only 10 raised their hands it was presumed that others were against the strike. Mehta was accused of playing into the hands of Kirit Panwala, executive committee member and ex-president.

Vishnubhai Trivedi says the logic was convoluted. He and 107 other lawyers demanded a special general meeting of the association through requisition saying they had lost faith in the president. They sought to move a no- confidence motion against Mehta.

Meanwhile, Panwala, who was accused of tampering with the minutes, resigned while the executive council, dominated by Mehta's supporters opined that the association constitution did not provide for any confidence or no confidence motion and hence the demand for Mehta's ouster was infructuous. Trivedi maintained otherwise and cited past instances when presidents had resigned on moral grounds when some members did not show faith in them.

To counter opposition to Mehta, his supporters came up with an old issue of favouritism in the selection of cricket team. The captain of the bar cricket team, who is believed to be close to Trivedi, was accused of unfair selection.

Mehta and company held no motion will be tabled on Saturday and only discussion will take place. Predictably, the meeting proved stormy. But neither the cricket issue could be discussed nor Mehta could be put on the mat. All he did was postpone the meeting indefinitely. The speed-breaker is no more an issue, presidency is.