https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349512 The Supreme Court of India upheld the statutory and rule-based designation of Senior Advocates, holding that the classification is a valid distinction based on merit, standing at the Bar, and special knowledge or experience in law, and not an unconstitutional title or equality violation. It also held that the designation process required greater objectivity, transparency, and uniformity, and framed a common framework for the Supreme Court and all High Courts using verifiable material, a Permanent Committee, a Secretariat, publication of proposals, data collection, interviews, and a point-based assessment system. The Meghalaya High Court amendments were not separately quashed, as the High Court indicated it would reconsider and take corrective steps. en-us Thu, 12 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Oct 2017 09:17:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349512 The Supreme Court of India upheld the statutory and rule-based designation of Senior Advocates, holding that the classification is a valid distinction based on merit, standing at the Bar, and special knowledge or experience in law, and not an unconstitutional title or equality violation. It also held that the designation process required greater objectivity, transparency, and uniformity, and framed a common framework for the Supreme Court and all High Courts using verifiable material, a Permanent Committee, a Secretariat, publication of proposals, data collection, interviews, and a point-based assessment system. The Meghalaya High Court amendments were not separately quashed, as the High Court indicated it would reconsider and take corrective steps. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 12 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349512