9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 1221X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dv. Mr. Zoheb Hussain, Adv. Mr. Vivek Gurnani, Adv. Mrs. Astha Singh, Adv. Mr. Bhuvan Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Digvijay Dam, Adv. Ms. Indira Jaising, Sr. Adv. (Petitioner-in-person) Mr. Pranav Sachdeva, AOR Ms. Neha Rathi, Adv. Mr. Abhay Nair, Adv. Mr. P Rohit Ram, Adv. Mr. Aditya Narendranath, Adv. Mr. Mohd Aman Alam, Adv. Ms. M.B. Ramya, Adv. Mr. Vipin Nair, AOR Ms. Sharmila Upadhyay, AOR Mr. Sarvjit Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Sahil Tagotra, AOR Dr. Anindita Pujari, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mohan V Katarki, Sr. Adv. Mr. Paras Nath Singh, Adv. Mr. Shaileshwar Yadav, Adv. Mr. Rohit Kumar, AOR Ms. Bhumika Chouksey, Adv. Mr. Ujjawal Gaur, Adv. Mr. Shailendra Singh, Adv. Mr. Harshvardhan Mall Vishen, Adv. Mr. Ravi Raghunath, AOR Mr. Prateek K Chadha, AOR Mr. Kunal Chatterji, AOR Ms. Maitrayee Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Rohit Bansal, Adv. Mr. Varij Nayan Mishra, Adv. Mr. Ahanthem Henry, Adv. Mr. Ahanthem Rohen Singh, Adv. Mr. Mohan Singh, Adv. Mr. Aniket Rajput, Adv. Ms. Khoisnam Nirmala Devi, Adv. Mr. Yeshu Mehta, Adv. Mr. Kumar Mihir, AOR Mr. Ashok Mathur, AOR Mr. Shailesh Madiyal, Sr. Adv. Ms. Dwivija Mahajan, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Adv. Mr. Korada Pramod Kumar, Adv. Mr. Mesala Venu Gopal, Adv. Mr. Nihant Pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Judges Recommending Candidates _________________ 78 F. Whether Applications for Designations are warranted 79 G. Diversity and Inclusivity in the Process _____________ 80 H. Income and Minimum Practice _____________________ 81 I. Secret Ballot_______________________________________ 82 J. Practice of Senior Advocates using a Special Gown __ 83 K. Need to frame proper Rules ________________________ 83 L. Permanent Secretariat _____________________________ 85 M. Need to Periodically Review the Procedure __________ 85 CONCLUSIONS _______________________________________ 86 FACTUAL BACKGROUND 1. By the judgment of this Court in the case of Jitender @ Kalla v. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Ors 2025 INSC 249 [for short, "Jitender @ Kalla"], a Bench of two judges of this Court expressed certain concerns regarding the process of designation of Senior Advocates laid down in the decision of this Court in the case of Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India (2017) 9 SCC 766 [for short, "Indira Jaising-1"]. The Bench directed that the concerns expressed by it be placed before the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India for considering whether the issues arising out of the said concerns ne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... govern the exercise of designation of Senior Advocates by the Supreme Court and all High Courts in the country. The norms/guidelines, in existence, shall be suitably modified so as to be in accord with the present. 73.1. All matters relating to designation of Senior Advocates in the Supreme Court of India and in all the High Courts of the country shall be dealt with by a Permanent Committee to be known as "Committee for Designation of Senior Advocates"; 73.2. The Permanent Committee will be headed by the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India and consist of two seniormost Judges of the Supreme Court of India [or High Court(s), as may be]; the learned Attorney General for India (Advocate General of the State in case of a High Court) will be a Member of the Permanent Committee. The above four Members of the Permanent Committee will nominate another Member of the Bar to be the fifth Member of the Permanent Committee; 73.3. The said Committee shall have a permanent Secretariat, the composition of which will be decided by the Chief Justice of India or the Chief Justices of the High Courts, as may be, in consultation with the other Members of the Permanent Committee; 73.4. Al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g by secret ballot will not normally be resorted to by the Full Court except when unavoidable. In the event of resort to secret ballot, decisions will be carried by a majority of the Judges who have chosen to exercise their preference/choice. 73.10. All cases that have not been favourably considered by the Full Court may be reviewed/reconsidered after expiry of a period of two years following the manner indicated above as if the proposal is being considered afresh; 73.11. In the event a Senior Advocate is guilty of conduct which according to the Full Court disentitles the Senior Advocate concerned to continue to be worthy of the designation, the Full Court may review its decision to designate the person concerned and recall the same." ( emphasis added ) 4. Recognising that the guidelines may require reconsideration in the future through suitable deletions/additions, in paragraph 74 of Indira Jaising-1, it was held that: - "74. We are not oblivious of the fact that the guidelines enumerated above may not be exhaustive of the matter and may require reconsideration by suitable additions/ deletions in the light of the experience to be gained over a period of time. This is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the process results in the designation of more meritorious candidates. The process of improvement is a continuous one and we learn from every experience. This is one more step in the finetuning of this exercise and we hope it achieves the purpose. The ultimate objective is to provide better assistance to litigants and the courts." ( emphasis added ) C. Order expressing doubts with Indira Jaising-1 and Indira Jaising-2 and inviting attention of the Hon'ble Chief Justice 7. In Jitender @ Kalla, the Appellant had filed a Special Leave Petition (for short, 'SLP') against an order of the High Court wherein the High Court directed reconsideration of an application for premature release of another convict. Though the Appellant was not a party to the petition in which the impugned order was passed, strangely, he challenged the said order. Further, while filing the SLP, the Appellant did not disclose that he was directed to undergo imprisonment for thirty years without remission. Therefore, this Court proceeded on the footing that it was a case of a simple life sentence. This Court passed an order dated 19th March Criminal Appeal No.865 of 2025 etc. Page 13 of 89 2024, issuing notic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns of this Court in Indira Jaising - I and Indira Jaising - II, and another decision in the case of Amar Vivek Aggarwal v. High Court of Punjab & Haryana and Ors (2022) 7 SCC 439. 11. This Court in its judgment dated 20th February 2025 in Jitender @ Kalla was of the view that the conduct of the Senior Advocate reflected from the orders of this Court raised an important question of whether the decisions of this Court in the case of Indira Jaising - I and Indira Jaising - II, which lay down the guidelines for designation of Senior Advocates by this Court and High Courts across the country under the 1961 Act, need reconsideration. A question also arose about whether the regime set up under the said decisions has worked effectively. This Court was of the view that a serious introspection was required to answer the question of whether the Rules framed in terms of the said decisions have ensured that only deserving Advocates are being designated. 12. This Court, accordingly, in paragraph 43 recorded its doubts and concerns with the judgments of this Court in Indira Jaising - I and Indira Jaising - II, and observed thus: "43. We are recording our concerns based on submissions made acr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nnot be held to have any standing at the Bar. Moreover, there may be complaints pending against an advocate with the disciplinary committee of the Bar Councils. The question is how the cases of such advocates can be considered by the Permanent Committee. Even if members of the Permanent Committee know that the applicant advocate lacks integrity, is not fair, does not act as an officer of the Court, or against whom complaints are pending for professional misconduct, there is no scope to reduce the points on that count. If such an advocate excels at the time of the interview or otherwise renders excellent performance, he cannot be given lesser marks because the candidate lacks integrity, character or fairness. The reason is that 25 marks are to be assigned not based on his performance before the Court or his general reputation but on his performance during the interview/interaction. e) As noted earlier, prior to 31st January 1974, the criteria in sub-section (2) of Section 16 was based on ability, experience and Criminal Appeal No.865 of 2025 etc. Page 19 of 89 standing at the Bar. That was substituted with effect from 31st January 1974. After the amendment, mere experience in ter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have very eminent lawyers practising exclusively before our Trial Courts who have the ability, standing and experience in law. They are outstanding public prosecutors and defence lawyers. In most cases, their arguments may not always have legal formulations, as reflected in the judgments in cases wherein they appear. The submissions will necessarily be based on facts. They will not have reported judgments to their credit. Such advocates do not stand to gain sufficient points against Sr. No. 2 in paragraph 73.7. We are of the view that designation under sub-section (2) of Section 16 cannot be the monopoly of the advocates practising in higher Constitutional Courts like this Court and the High Courts. Chapter 6, in part VI of the Constitution of India, in a sense, gives the status of Constitutional Courts to our trial and district courts." 13. Based on the doubts and concerns expressed in paragraph 43 of the judgment dated 20th February 2025, this Court, in paragraph 45, observed thus: "45. Considering what we have observed in paragraph no. 43 above, we direct the Registrar (Judicial) to place a copy of this judgment before Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India. It is for the Hon'bl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out of the designation process conducted at the High Court of Patna, seeking modification of the guidelines laid down in the cases of Indira Jaising I and II to bring objectivity, transparency and fairness. These applications were dismissed by the Order of the Registrar dated 23rd December 2021 in terms of Order XV Rule 5 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, observing Criminal Appeal No.865 of 2025 etc. Page 24 of 89 that the sum and substance of these IAs was in the nature of seeking review of the judgment in Indira Jaising II. IA 45959/2022 is an appeal against the Registrar's order dated 23rd December 2021. b) IA No. 55879/2023 in MA No.1502/2020 in WP (C) 454/2015 These applications pray for the reconsideration and modification of guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in light of the observations made in Paragraph 74 of Indira Jaising I. The applicant has made several suggestions, including giving special privilege to Advocates with 30 years' experience, deleting the criteria for publications, deleting the marking on the basis of an interview, conducting voting by secret ballot, designating Advocates without requiring submission of applications and designating mofussil A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... merely a signpost which gives a broad roadmap for designation and that this Court would have to use its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to fill gaps and improve the system as and when needed. He submitted that the inclusion of Advocates in the Permanent Committee is not restricted by Section 16 of the Advocates Act and has been made by this Court using powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. 18. The learned Attorney General has also shared with this Court his experiences while being part of the Permanent Committee for the designation of Senior Advocates by the Supreme Court. The learned Attorney General frankly stated that it was not possible for him to peruse the entire material submitted by applicants, such as books, articles, reported judgments, etc., as it was very voluminous. He admitted that it is not possible for the Permanent Committee to peruse all the material. He submitted that the assignment of marks by the Permanent Committee of the Supreme Court was in the nature of recommendations, after which there was nothing else for the Full Court to add, except to confirm these recommendations. The learned Attorney General was of the view t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ia or the Advocate General for the respective state, is not only unjustified but also contrary to the intent of the provision, which entrusts this responsibility solely to the Full Court. Additionally, he submitted that the procedure prescribed by Indira Jaising- 1 restricts the use of voting by secret ballot only in unavoidable circumstances. He argued that the stature of individuals forming part of the Permanent Committee may discourage or deter other judges from expressing their views freely. To ensure that the collective view of the Full Court is expressed without any undue influence, he urged that voting by secret ballot be reinstated as a mandatory practice. 21. The learned Solicitor General raised serious objections to the marks system postulated by Indira Jaising-1. He contended that Section 16 of the Advocates Act provides for designation based on three predominant criteria: an Advocate's standing at the Bar, special knowledge, or experience in law. However, he submitted that the marks system, as presently structured, fails to account for an Advocate's standing at the Bar, which, in his view, can only be assessed through their performance in court and integrity. 22. He p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appearing for the High Court of Delhi largely supported the submissions made by the learned Solicitor General. He submitted that designation must be by conferment and not by application. He submitted that there should be representations from the Bar and that a proposal for designation can be initiated by the Chief Justice, two sitting judges, or any two Senior Advocates who have been designated for more than 5 years. He submitted that such proposals should be placed before the Full Court, which would vote on them through the method of secret ballots. He submitted that such proposals should be considered twice a year, or at the very least once a year. D. Submissions on behalf of the High Court of Karnataka 26. The learned advocate for the High Court of Karnataka stated that a committee had been constituted to invite suggestions. The learned advocate submitted that the suggestions received were that interviews should be discontinued. However, if the committee that is considering proposals for designation is not acquainted with a particular applicant for the reason that he has not practiced before that court because he practices in a different region or only before Trial Courts, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g system. They also suggest promoting diversity and equal opportunities for women, first-generation lawyers, lawyers from diverse regions, including District Courts, and representation in different fields of law, not just traditional litigation. The High Court has also represented that secret ballot must be restricted. There must also be consideration of specialization-based designations, recognizing pro bono work and legal scholarship, introducing review mechanism for rejected candidates, and standardized rules for all High Courts. F. Submissions on behalf of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana 28. Shri P.S. Patwalia, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, submitted that his submissions are in tune with the submissions made by the learned Solicitor General. He submitted that the requirement of an interview for Advocates seeking designation as Senior Advocates is unnecessary and reduces the importance of courtroom performances. Accordingly, he submitted that the evaluation should be based on courtroom performance rather than an interview process. The learned Senior Advocate submitted that in accordance with Section 16 of the Advocates Act, n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quire a review petition to be placed before it in accordance with Article 137 of the Constitution of India read with Order XLVII of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013. Further, any reconsideration beyond the remit of paragraph 74 would have to be referred to a larger bench. 31. On the merits of the case, Ms. Jaising opened her submissions by supporting the system introduced by Indira Jaising - I and Indira Jaising - II. Ms. Jaising contended that the designation process must be objective, fair, and transparent, and no power should remain unguided. Since the exercise of designation is an administrative function of the Supreme Court, it is subject to the scrutiny of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Clear guidelines are required to prevent arbitrary decision-making. 32. On the marking system, Ms. Jaising admitted that there is no provision for awarding lower marks for lack of integrity. She argued that the existing marking system is not exhaustive. She acknowledged that the merit of a candidate should not be solely determined by academic qualifications but should be assessed based on multiple factors such as reputation, conduct, and integrity. She submitted that there are two met ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... factor in designation. 36. Ms. Jaising advocated for retaining publications as a factor in assessment. She submitted that for evaluating the judgment and academic work submitted by the candidates, the Permanent Committee can take assistance from experts from the field of academics in law or of the Centre for Research and Planning functioning under the aegis of this Court. 37. On the issue of how to determine experience at the Bar as some Advocates may have enrolled decades back but not be in active practice, Ms. Jaising submitted that it is not practically possible to calculate years of active/actual practice. She submitted that any system may not be able to take into account contingencies faced by Advocates, and the date of enrolment should continue to be the criterion. 38. On the issue of domain expertise, she acknowledged that specialization exists, with some Advocates practicing exclusively in tax law or before specialized tribunals like the National Green Tribunal. She submitted that such Advocates should be assessed based on their judgments and contributions within their specific domains. 39. Ms. Jaising also advocated for declaring cutoff marks and declaring the same aft ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Section 16(2) of the Advocates Act is an honour and privilege conferred by the Full Court on Advocates of standing and experience. He submitted that Section 16 mandates obtaining the Advocate's consent for designation, reinforcing that it is a recognition of merit. He further argued that the procedure in Indira Jaising-1 improperly confers an inherent right to be considered for designation without any mechanism to address grievances, hence the entire system of applications is contrary to the statutory scheme. J. Submissions of Respondent no. 2 (complainant) in Jitender @ Kalla v. State of NCT Delhi (Crl.) Appeal No. 865 of 2025 44. Learned counsel Shri Pranav Sachdeva, appearing for Respondent No. 2, i.e., the complainant in Criminal Appeal No. 865 of 2025, supported the application system introduced in Indira Jaising-1. He refuted the contention that the application procedure, including an interview, demeans Advocates seeking a distinction. He noted that several high-level appointments, such as the Central Vigilance Commissioner, Lokpal, and Central Information Commissioner, are made through a similar application process. He submitted that the application system promotes t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lace of the words 'experience and standing at the Bar'. 49. We may note here that in the statement of objects and reasons of the Advocates Act, it was mentioned that the main feature of the Act was the integration of the Bar into a single class of legal practitioners known as Advocates. Perhaps, the need was felt to do so by the Legislature as prior to the commencement of the Advocates Act, there were different classes of legal practitioners such as Supreme Court Advocates, High Court Advocates/Pleaders, Advocates of High Court (OS), District Court Pleaders, Vakils, Mukhtars, Revenue Agents etc. Though the object was to make integration of the Bar into a single class, Subsection (1) of Section 16 created two classes of Advocates, namely, Senior Advocates and other Advocates. The power to designate an Advocate as Senior Advocate is vested with this Court and the High Courts. 50. There are restrictions imposed by this Court as well as the High Courts on the designated Senior Advocates. For example, clause (b) of Rule 2 of Order (IV) of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 imposes restrictions on Senior Advocates. One such restriction is that a Senior Advocate shall not file a vakalatnama ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nication skills (vii) confidence and (viii) commitment to administration of justice and rule of law. Some of the qualities which give an Advocate a standing at the Bar are as follows: (a) He/she is always fair while conducting cases before the Courts; (b) His/her behaviour with the Judges and other members of the Bar is respectful; (c) He/she maintains decorum while conducting cases before the Court; (d) He/she always acts first as an officer of the Court and, thereafter, a mouthpiece of his/her client; (e) He/she follows the highest standards of professional etiquette and ethics; (f) He/she acts as a mentor to the junior Advocates; (g) He/she does pro bono work; and (h) He/she carries respect in the legal fraternity. 54. We must note here that honesty and integrity are the qualities which every member of the Bar, whether senior or otherwise, must possess. This is something basic. Merely because an Advocate is a good human being, this by itself does not qualify the Advocate for designation. (iii) Special Knowledge of Law 55. Sub-section (2) of Section 16 refers to 'special knowledge of law'. If an Advocate has special knowledge in a particular branch of law, tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Courts of the country are concerned, it appears that there is no uniform criteria or yardstick. Age; income; length of practise; requirement of practise in the High Court in which designation is sought or in a court subordinate to such High Court, appear to be the broad parameters which different High Courts have adopted either by incorporation of all such parameters or some or few of them. The position would be clear from the following resume which indicates the practice prevailing in different High Courts of the country." 56.1 In paragraph 58 of the said decision, this Court observed that an endeavour should be to lay down norms/guidelines/parameters to make the exercise conform to the three requirements of the statute, namely, the ability of the Advocate concerned, his/her standing and his/her special knowledge or experience in law. In paragraphs 69 and 70, this Court observed thus: "69. The guidelines governing the exercise of designation by the Supreme Court have already been noticed so also the guidelines in force in the various High Courts. Though steps have been taken to bring in some objective parameters, we are of the view that the same must be more comprehensively co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to bring about uniformity in the norms/guidelines followed by this Court and High Courts in the designation of Advocates as Senior Advocates. This exercise was undertaken, obviously, invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution of India as a measure to ensure transparency in the process. This step was also necessitated due to absence of Statutory Rules framed under the Advocates Act. It was an experiment made by this Court to bring about uniformity in approach. An effort was made to make the process more objective. However, this Court was not oblivious of the fact that the guidelines may require changes from time to time. Therefore, in paragraph 74, this Court observed thus: "74. We are not oblivious of the fact that the guidelines enumerated above may not be exhaustive of the matter and may require reconsideration by suitable additions/deletions in the light of the experience to be gained over a period of time. This is a course of action that we leave open for consideration by this Court at such point of time that the same becomes necessary." ( emphasis added ) 57.1 Thus, this Court has given enough indication that what was done under Indir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled in Court ought to be considered. Synopses can be a useful indicator for assessing the assistance rendered by an advocate to the Court. Candidates should thus be permitted to submit five of their best synopses for evaluation with their applications. 36. Now turning to another aspect under this head, it may be noticed that many specialised tribunals have been set up, and several advocates have concentrated their practice before such tribunals. The specialised tribunals are the National Company Law Tribunal, Appellate Tribunal for Electricity, Appellate Tribunal under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal, Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, etc. This has led to the opening up of various specialisations, including but not limited to arbitration, telecom, electricity, energy, competition, insolvency, and white-collar crime. 37. Often appeals from those tribunals lie to this Court and, thus, such advocates also appear before this Court, although the frequency of their appearances may be less. Specialised lawyers with domain expertise should be permitted to concentrate on their fields and not be deprived of the oppo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C. 100 Point based Overall Assessment - The basis of Decision Making 61. The entire argument revolves around the point-based overall assessment of the Advocates for designation as Senior Advocates. The scheme of Indira Jaising-1 stipulates putting in place a Permanent Committee in this Court and the High Courts. The Chief Justice and the two senior-most Judges will be part of the Permanent Committee along with the Attorney General for India or Advocate General of the State, as the case may be, and another member of the Bar nominated by the other four members of the Permanent Committee. Apart from the Permanent Committee, Permanent Secretariats were ordered to be established for receiving applications for designation and processing the applications. 62. The Permanent Committee was entrusted with the task of interviewing the applicants and assigning points out of 100 as specified in tabular form in paragraph 73.7 of Indira Jaising-1. The scheme of the directions is that a point-based overall assessment is made by the Permanent Committee. All the names placed before the Permanent Committee, along with the point-based assessment made by the Committee, are placed before the Full Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . In any event, the involvement of members of the Bar in the actual decision-making process by the Full Court in terms of Sub-section (2) of Section 16 cannot be supported by law. In short, he has rightly raised an issue of propriety. From what we have seen during the seven and a half years after Indira Jaising-1, perhaps, the involvement of the members of the Bar in the process calls for serious reconsideration. We hasten to add that this is no reflection on the capabilities of the Senior Advocates who have acted as members of the Permanent Committees. The Courts seeking views of senior members of the Bar on some of the applicants is completely different from allowing senior members of the Bar to become a part of the decision-making process of the Permanent Committee. Sub-section (2) of Section 16 may not be averse to allowing consultation by the High Court/this Court with the senior members of the Bar. However, the provision does not allow the participation of the Bar members in the actual decision-making process. The effects of such participation have been brought to our notice across the Bar. Suffice it to say that the participation of two senior members of the Bar will need re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... teraction with the applicants. 68. The designation of an Advocate as a Senior Advocate is different from making an appointment to the post. The question is whether it is fair to assess personality and suitability only on the basis of a brief interview for a few minutes, and whether the Permanent Committee can assess personality and suitability by assigning points out of 25, which again constitute 1/4th of the total points. Interaction or interview for a few minutes by any standard is not sufficient to assess the personality and suitability of the concerned Advocate. Such brief interactions can at best give an outer view of the applicant. The points out of 25 have to be assigned by assessing personality and suitability only on the basis of the applicant's performance in the interview. Hence, if someone is impressive in an interview, he or she can get very good marks even if his or her general reputation is not up to the mark. 69. After Indira Jaising-1, this Court and High Courts have conducted a number of exercises for designating Advocates as Senior Advocates. In many such processes, there were more than 100 applicants. It may be appropriate, on this background, to ask a difficu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Court that the exercise was very difficult and tiring or may not be to the extent needed. We cannot say that the members of the Committee are able to go through every document. Moreover, this makes the process very subjective. A suggestion was made that this exercise can be outsourced to the Registrars/Centre for Research and Planning (CRP). We do not think that this important work can be outsourced to any entity or group of individuals. (v) Publications 73. If an Advocate has authored articles or a thesis on complex legal issues or has published books on legal subjects to his credit, depending upon the quality of writing, it adds to the standing of the Advocate. However, it will be unjust to give weightage to such work done by the Advocate by assigning points out of 5. Writing articles or books is not an essential criterion for designation. It is an additional consideration. 74. The experience of the last seven and a half years shows that it may not be rationally or objectively possible to assess calibre, standing at the Bar, and the experience in law of the Advocates who apply for designation on the basis of a pointbased format. That has not achieved the desired objective. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ications for Designations are warranted 77. Obviously, this Court or the High Court cannot designate any Advocate as a Senior Advocate without his consent. The strength of the Bar is ever-increasing. Therefore, it would practically not be possible to seek the consent of a large number of deserving Advocates. Therefore, the practice of making a formal application can be continued. An Act of making application will amount to consent of the Advocate for being considered for designation. Act of making such applications may not necessarily amount to soliciting the designation. The practice of allowing applications to be made has practical advantages. The educational qualifications, experience in law, field of practice, income, pro bono work, work of mentoring juniors, articles and books, writing publications, etc., are relevant in the process of designation. Instead of the Court's Registry calling for these details, it becomes more convenient if the Advocates furnish the details along with their applications. We, therefore, find no difficulty in continuing the practice of Advocates applying for designation. In view of what we have held earlier, a deserving Advocate who does not apply ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her there should be a secret ballot must be left to the wisdom of the Full Court. But the decision-making on designation, as far as possible, should be by consensus. If that is not possible, the decision-making must be by a democratic process and shall be governed by a majority of votes. J. Practice of Senior Advocates using a Special Gown 82. Another issue raised by Ms. Indira Jaising was that the practice of designated Senior Advocates using different type of gowns has no basis in the Advocates Act. Therefore, according to her, this practice deserves to be discontinued. It is for the High Courts to take a call on this aspect while framing rules. K. Need to frame proper Rules 83. Even in the absence of a specific provision under the Advocates Act, this Court and High Courts, being the Constitutional Courts, have a power to frame rules. The power of this Court can be traced to Article 145(1)(a). The High Courts can exercise power under Article 227(2)(b). It is necessary that proper Rules must be framed dealing with the entire process of designating Advocates as Senior Advocates. The object of the rules must be to bring objectivity, transparency and fair play in the entire pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f designation and not a single undeserving person is designated. CONCLUSIONS 87. We, therefore, pass following orders: (i) We direct that the directions contained in paragraph 73.7 of Indira Jaising-1 as amended by Indira Jaising-2 shall not be implemented; (ii) It will be appropriate if all the High Courts frame Rules in terms of what is held in this decision within a period of 4 months from today by amending or substituting the existing Rules. The Rules shall be made keeping in view the following guidelines: a. The decision to confer designation shall be of the Full Court of the High Courts or this Court; b. The applications of all candidates found to be eligible by the Permanent Secretariat along with relevant documents submitted by the applicants shall be placed before the Full House. An endeavour can always be made to arrive at consensus. However, if a consensus on designation of Advocates is not arrived at, the decision-making must be by a democratic method of voting. Whether in a given case there should be a secret ballot, is a decision which can be best left to the High Courts to take a call considering facts and circumstances of the given case; c. Minimum qual ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
