TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1639X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vailable 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 a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... preme Court Lawyers Chambers (Allotment and Occupancy) Rules (hereinafter referred to as the 'Chamber Allotment Rules') which govern the procedure for allotment of chambers within the compound of Supreme Court. These rules lay down the eligibility criteria for allotment of chambers. In accordance with these rules, the Hon ble Chief Justice of India (CJI) has also constituted the Judges' Allotment Committee. It comprises of Hon ble Judges of this Court, nominated by CJI. There is another Committee as well, which is headed by the Attorney General for India and office bearer of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) as well as Supreme Court Advocate on Record Association (SCAORA). On the basis of recommendations of the Allotment Committee(s), the CJI ordinarily allots chambers to the advocates. 3) In the year 1995, a recommendation was made by the Allotment Committee for allotment of chambers to AOR, non-advocates on record (other advocates) and senior advocates in the ratio of 7:2:1. This recommendation was accepted by the CJI on August 29, 1995. Since then, allotment is made in the aforesaid ratio to the aforesaid three categories of advocates. 4) Relevant Chamb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /her retirement joins back the practice and is made active member of Supreme Court Bar Association on his/her application for allotment. xx xx xx 23. The Chief Justice of India may from time to time make such amendments and additions to these Rules as may be necessary and expedient. 24. If any question arises as to the interpretation of these Rules, the decision of the Chief Justice of India shall be final. 5) It may be mentioned that the allotment to these chambers is made on the availability thereof and, at that time, applications for allotment of chambers are invited. This exercise was conducted last time in the year 2004. Thereafter, i.e. after a gap of thirteen years, the Supreme Court invited applications for allotment of Lawyers chambers on October 31, 2017 and May 16, 2018 vide Notice inviting applications where eligibility criteria was also stipulated. In the notice dated October 31, 2017, following eligibility criteria was mentioned: Online Applications are hereby invited from Senior Advocates, Advocates-on-Record who are members of the Supreme Court Bar Association and fulfill the following eligibility criteria for updating the existing Panels for allot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... They sent representations to SCBA as well as Secretary General, Supreme Court of India, requesting for change of criteria for eligibility of allotment of chambers. Specific grievance was with respect to the fixation of block period between June 01, 2011 to June 30, 2016 for which the requirement of filing and/or appearance has to be fulfilled. As per the petitioners, the matter was dealt with by the Chamber Allotment Committee headed by the Attorney General and some amendments were carried out. On that basis, SCBA issued circular for its members on March 15, 2018 mentioning the changes, accepted by the Chamber Allotment Committee. This circular reads as under: The Letter dated 09.01.2018 was discussed at length in today s Chambers Allotment Committee Meeting and the recommendations made therein have been accepted by the Committee to the extent detailed below: (i) Calendar Year now will be January to December instead of June to May. (ii) The period of eligibility for filing/appearances shall be from 01.01.2004 to 31st December 2017 (Two consecutive years). (iii) Self Attested proceedings print out from the website i.e. www.sci.gov.in shall be sufficient compliance for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o must have minimum of 50 appearances (Admission and regular hearing matters excluding I.A.s/Cr.M.P.s save and except interim applications in Public Interest Litigations which are *substantive applications and decided by the Court and such petitions like Special Leave Petitions filed with applications for condonation of delay and listed in Court with Diary Number and disposed of with diary number by the Court) each year either for any two consecutive years between 01.06.2011 and 30.06.2016 or for any two non-consecutive years between 01.06.2011 and 30.06.2016 provided the Advocate/Applicant concerned availing the option of appearances during two non-consecutive years has been on the Voters list of Supreme Court Bar Association for the entire block period. (Registrar s Court Appearance shall not be taken into consideration). (c) Subject to the above two requirements being complied with, the allotment shall be made based on priority of the date of their being designated as Senior Advocate. 2. ADVOCATES-ON-RECORD (a) Who must have filed (or entered appearances on behalf of respondents) on an average 20 cases per annum (i.e. admission/regular matters and not I.A.s/Cr.M.Ps and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by addressing communication dated July 18, 2018 to CJI wherein it was stated that following provisions pertaining to allotment of chambers were not incorporated in the notice dated May 16, 2018 which was issued for inviting applications for allotment of chambers: 1. Eligibility of Advocates who had requisite number of filing/appearances from Calendar year January December 2004 to December 2017 instead of May 2011 to June 2016. 2. Requisite Calendar year shall be 1st January to 31st December instead of filing/appearance year 1st July to 30th June. 3. Number of filing by Advocates-on-Record of Government/State Cases shall be counted for the purpose of eligibility criteria. 4. Non-Advocates-On-Record satisfying the appearances criteria, becoming Advocates-On-Record in 2016 onwards not satisfying the filing criteria in less than 2 years, be included in the panel of Advocates- On-Record in order of their seniority as Advocate-On- Record. 5. Similarly, AORs and Non-AORs subsequently designated as Senior Advocates from 2016 onwards, satisfying the eligibility norms as Advocates-On- Record/Non Advocates-On-Record be included in the panel of Senior Advocates in chronology ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Quashing of Condition 2(a) of revised notice inviting applications for allotment of Lawyers Chambers dated 16.05.2018. 11 Vikram Gulati, WP(C) No. 1063/2018 (i) Change of block period from 01.06.2011-30.06.2016 to 01.01.2004 to 31.12.2017. (ii) To not insist on the condition of his name being on voters list of SCBA and to include NCR to the place of residence. (iii) Calendar year to be from January to December instead of June to May and the cut-off period be extended till 31.12.2017. 12 Divyesh Pratap Singh, WP(C) No. 1058/2018 Cut-off period be extended till 30.08.2018. 13) From the aforesaid, it can be seen that following issues have been raised in these writ petitions: (i) Change of Block Period: Notice dated May 16, 2018 mentions the block period from June 01, 2011 to June 30, 2016. Different petitioners have suggested different block periods which are: (a) block period should be January 01, 2005 to October 17, 2017/May 16, 2018; (b) January 01, 2005 to December 31, 2017; (c) Period from January 01, 2004 to May 31, 2011 should al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to 31.12.2015) so that more and more eligible Advocates may apply. 15) The aforementioned recommendations were placed for approval and orders before the Hon'ble Judges Committee for approving allotment of Lawyers Chambers and thereafter, were also placed before the CJI. The comments made by the Registry in this regard were also placed before the Hon'ble Judges Committee on July 11, 2016. Considering the comments made by the Registry that chambers in Pragati Maidan will be available sometime in the end of 2017 and if block period is confined to the year 2015 as resolved by the Chamber Allotment committee headed by the learned Attorney General for India, advocates who may complete minimum number of appearances after 2015 may not apply for allotment and, therefore, it was submitted for consideration, if the block period should be upto December 31, 2015 or June 30, 2016 or some other dates. 16) The Hon'ble Judges Committee, inter alia, recommended that the block period may be changed so as to make it from June 01, 2011 to June 30, 2016. The same was also approved by the then CJI vide order dated July 28, 2016. Accordingly, notification dated October 31, 2017 invitin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hon ble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri. Following order was passed by the Bench today:- Issue notice, returnable in two weeks. Dasti, in addition, is also permitted. The respondents shall endeavour to file their reply before the next day of hearing. We are informed that 31.07.2018 is the last date for making application for allotment of chambers. The petitioners herein may make their applications which may be received/accepted provisionally and kept separately. In the circumstances, the Committee feels it would be inappropriate to deal with the matter till the pending matter is disposed of on the judicial side. 19) On one hearing, when the matters came up before the Court, Mr. Maninder Singh, learned ASG, appearing for the Supreme Court, made a statement that he along with President, SCBA and office bearers of SCAORA would deliberate on the issues raised and shall try to arrive at a consensus. 20) When the matters were taken up on October 4, 2018, the learned ASG submitted note proposing the solution to the various issues. The suggestion given in the said 'Note' are as under: 1. (i) The consideration of the request for allotment of chambers to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rate categories of advocates shall be counted from the last cut-off date in 2004 till 30th September, 2018 or any other date which may be decided by the Supreme Court. 5. It is the firm suggestion on behalf of the SCBA that the process for lodging/submitting applicatoins for allotment of chambers by Members of SCBA, in any of the above mentioned 3 categories, should be a continuous process, i.e., whenever any member of the SCBA belonging to any of the 3 categories fulfils the requirement of the criteria prescribed for becoming eligible for consideration for allotment of chamber by the Supreme Court, his/her application shall be accepted by the Registry. This would completely eliminate the uncertainty with regard to opening of the period for inviting such applications. The procedure/mechanism of accepting applications throughout the year, on continuous basis, is the norm which is being followed almost in every High Court. Adoption of such a mechanism/methodology of such a process to remain operative continuously would be beneficial to the members of the SCBA and would also remove possible anomalies and irritants in this entire process. 6. Insofar as the AORs are concerned who ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the aforesaid 'Note' of suggestions. 23) This leaves us to decide the following issues: (a) Change of block period. (b) Validity of condition of membership of SCBA contained in Rule 3 of the Allotment Rules. (c) Validity of condition of resident of an advocate in Delhi/New Delhi contained in Rule 3. 24) Change of Block Period: We have already accepted the suggestions 1, 2 and 3 of the Note. The paragraph 4 of the Note, however, mentions that period of 730 days for fulfillment of the eligibility criteria shall be counted from the last cut-off date in 2004 till September 30, 2018. This suggestion cannot be accepted as it is way too off the mark and may have no connection with the active practice requirement of an advocate, having proximity with the date when the applications for allotment are invited. It hardly needs to be emphasised that pre-requisite for allotment of chamber is that the concerned advocate should be in active practice. That is why the eligibility criteria for member advocates is the requirement of 50 appearances per year in the block year; for AORs, it is minimum of 20 filings or 50 appearances in a period of one year for two years and minim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the validity of this rule submit that this eligibility criteria is discriminatory and violates the fundamental rights guaranteed to them under Articles 14, 19(1)(c) and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. Expanding this argument, Mr. Gopal Sankaranarayanan, who appeared for writ petitioner in 844 of 2018 submitted that SCAORA is also a represented body like SCBA and, therefore, membership of anyone of these bodies should be enough for making a person eligible to be considered for allotment of chambers. It was argued that SCAORA was also a vibrant body which was formed for the welfare of AOR. Therefore, the measure in the allotment of Lawyers Chambers Rules that restricts eligibility for allotment of chambers to members of the SCBA and excludes those who are members only of the SCAORA is manifestly arbitrary. Reliance is placed in this regard on the judgment of this Court in Shayara Bano v. Union of India(2017) 9 SCC 1), where it was held as follows: 87. The thread of reasonableness runs through the entire fundamental rights chapter. What is manifestly arbitrary is obviously unreasonable and being contrary to the rule of law, would violate Article 14. Further, there is an apparent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h a classification that excludes the association of those advocates as prescribed under Article 145(1) (a) of the Constitution of India read with the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 is unreasonable and has no rational nexus with the object sought to be achieved, i.e., the allotment of chambers to the regular practitioners of the Supreme Court. Mr. Sankaranarayanan went to the extent of contending that given the role of AOR in the administration of justice by the Supreme Court, it was more important in nature than even SCBA. It was submitted that AOR are given pre-eminence position as they: (i) Undertake an examination administered by the Supreme Court; (ii) Are the only advocates authorised to act on behalf of a client in the Supreme Court; (iii) Adhere to strict stipulations regarding office location, maintenance of accounts and filing of returns, unlike any other class of advocates. (iv) Are recognized as such by judgments of this Court from 1964 onwards. This is even acknowledged by the Chamber Allotment Rules which earmarks nearly 70% of the chambers of the AOR. 30) He further argued that the impugned Rule amounts to a compulsion for AOR to become a member of the SCBA, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Vikas Singh, in support, relied upon the judgment of this Court in Vinay Balachandra Joshi v. Registrar General, Supreme Court of India Ors. (1998) 7 SCC 461). It was a matter pertaining to allotment of chambers within the compound of the Supreme Court itself. One of the contentions of the petitioners therein was that not making available chambers to the AOR within the Supreme Court compound is violative of fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution and this contention was rejected in the following manner: 4. We will first deal with the contention raised by the petitioners in Writ Petitions Nos. 883 and 1223 of 1990, that not making available chambers to the Advocates-on-Record within the Supreme Court compound is violative of their fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. It was submitted that Article 19(1)(g) guarantees, inter alia, the right to practise any profession. Practising legal profession is thus a fundamental right. An Advocate-on-Record can exercise this fundamental right of his effectively only if he is provided with a chamber within the Supreme Court premises. Therefore, to make a chamber available to him is an integral pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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. 36) The respondents are also correct in their submission that there is no fundamental right or any statutory right for allotment of chambers in any court premises. This aspect has already been decided in Vinay Balachandra Joshi, relevant discussion whereof has been reproduced above. Further, in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No. 1, significance of membership of SCBA is highlighted in order to avail various facilities. It is, inter alia, stated that facilities like Library, Parking, Canteen, Medical etc. become available only to the members of the Bar Association of the concerned courts and such a stipulation is prevalent in almost every court in the cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y valid and legal. 37) We, therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with the requirement of being a member of SCBA for submitting application for allotment of chambers. 38) Alternative submission of the petitioners is that if the rule is upheld, an opportunity should be given to those members of SCAORA, who have not become the members of SCBA so far, to apply and become the member of SCBA even now and on that condition, their applications for allotment of chambers be entertained. Insofar as this submission is concerned, once the petitioners or other similarly situated persons become members of SCBA, they can make such a request to the Chambers Committee while making their applications for allotment of chambers and it will be for the Chambers Committee to take a view thereupon. 39) Prescription of the requirement of resident in Delhi or New Delhi in Rule 3 of the Allotment Rules: In one of the petitions, this provision is challenged. It is submitted that there is no rationale in prescribing the condition that an advocate to become eligible for allotment of chamber should be a resident in Delhi or New Delhi. Argument was that in last few years, there was exponential g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
