Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2018 (10) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (10) TMI 1639 - SUPREME COURTAllotment of chambers to AOR - invitation for applications for allotment of chambers - pre-condition of being a member of SCBA before consideration of allotment of chambers - Rule 3 of the Allotment Rules - Change of block period - Validity of condition of membership of SCBA contained in Rule 3 of the Allotment Rules - Validity of condition of resident of an advocate in Delhi/New Delhi contained in Rule 3. Change of block period - Held that:- Since, sometime has elapsed when the block period was fixed by the Judges' Allotment Committee and we have extended the date for making application, the only modification which can be done is to put the block period from October 01, 2013 to September 30, 2018. It is during this period the applicant shall have to satisfy the criteria and appearances or filing - We are also not accepting the suggestion given in Para 5 of the Note that the allotment of chambers should be a continuous process. There has been a consistent practice in the past of inviting applications from time to time whenever lawyers' chambers become available for allotment. It should be maintained as there is no reason to depart from the same. Otherwise, the purpose of fixing proximate block period shall also get defeated. At the same time, we also find that last such applications were invited in the year 2004 and considerable period has lapsed thereafter. Therefore, in order to ensure that such situation does not occur in future, we are of the opinion that Notice inviting such applications should be at least once in three years. Validity of Rule 3 of the Allotment Rules - Held that:- The entire edifice of the petitioners case stands demolished. No doubt, SCAORA has its significant position in this Court. However, we are concerned with the issue of allotment of chambers. The petitioners have submitted that members of SCAORA should be treated as sufficient eligibility for allotment of chambers. Yet, in order to become a member of SCAORA, as per Rule 4 of the Rules and Regulations of SCAORA itself, an advocate has to be the member of SCBA. Therefore, unless an advocate is an AOR and also a member of SCBA, he cannot become the member of SCAORA. This requirement itself accepts the position that SCBA is an umbrella organisation and also recognises the vital role it plays. Thus, the argument based on Article 14 of the Constitution would be of no avail - there is no reason to interfere with the requirement of being a member of SCBA for submitting application for allotment of chambers. Validity of condition of resident of an advocate in Delhi/New Delhi contained in Rule 3 - Held that:- If an aerial distance is taken, his residence falls within 16km radius as he is residing in Indirapuram, Ghaziabad (U.P.). Plea is that if the definition of resident member is seen, as defined in Rule 3(ix), it means a member residing and practicing as an advocate in Delhi or its suburbs and “suburbs” clearly includes NCR also. Therefore, all those who are staying in NCR should be made eligible for allotment of chambers. Many advocates who appear in courts in Delhi, including the Supreme Court, commute on daily basis from their residences which fall in neighbouring States. It is time to reconsider as to whether requirement of residence in Delhi or New Delhi in Rule 3 of the Allotment Rules needs to be retained or it should be extended to some areas of neighbouring States which are quite close to the vicinity of the Supreme Court. May be, by fixing a particular radial distance from the Supreme Court, the problem can be tackled - As it would require consideration on so many aspects, we are of the opinion that this issue can be considered by the Judges' Allotment Committee. We make it clear that it is for the Committee to take a final view on this issue, after taking into consideration all the relevant factors. Petition disposed off.
|