TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 1221
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Maroria, AOR Mr. Annam Venkatesh, Adv. 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. Me....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aph 74 of Indira Jaising-1 and paragraph 51 of Indira Jaising-2______ 77 E. 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'....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t we proceed to venture into the exercise and lay down the following norms/guidelines which henceforth would 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 t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....action 25 points 73.8. All the names that are listed before the Permanent Committee/cleared by the Permanent Committee will go to the Full Court. 73.9. Voting 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 guidel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 6. While disposing of the applications for modifications, the coordinate Bench reiterated that the process of improvement is a continuous one and noted: "51. We only hope that our endeavour to simplify some aspects of 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rd January, 2025 passed in SLP (Crl.) Nos.1484-1496 of 2024. 10. Considering the conduct of the concerned Senior Advocate, a contention was raised by Shri Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General of India for reconsideration of earlier decisions 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 designate....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ncerned based on a points-based formula. No other method of making an overall assessment has been provided. No one can dispute that an advocate who lacks integrity or does not possess a quality of fairness is disentitled to designation. The reason is simple as such an advocate cannot 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 earli....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cial side. Therefore, the issue of permitting voting by secret ballot needs serious reconsideration. i) There is one more serious area of concern. Whether the guidelines give sufficient opportunity to the advocates practising in our Trial Courts to get designated. There cannot be any dispute that we 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he concerns expressed about the guidelines laid down by this Court. In addition to the issues flagged in paragraph 43 of Jitender @ Kalla, we will be addressing the issues raised in the following applications: a) IA 45959/2022 in IA No.145730-31/2021 in MA No.1502/2020 in WP (C) 454/2015 IA 145730-31 in MA 1502/2020 arises 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 In....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l applicants are his peers, whom he knows personally. If the interview is to be retained, the learned Attorney General would submit that personal questions regarding how the applicant is as a person should be asked instead of legal questions. He submitted that the factors of the marking system can change over the years. He submitted that Section 16 of the Advocates Act is 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 volum....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a (or Advocate General for the State in case of a High Court); and a fifth member from the bar appointed by the above four members. He further argued that Section 16 vests the Supreme Court and High Courts with discretionary power to designate Senior Advocates, thereby excluding any external participation. Consequently, the involvement of members of the bar, including the Attorney General for India 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e prevention of canvassing/lobbying, has not been fulfilled. He submitted that the inclusion of members of the Bar in the selection process, coupled with the establishment of a Permanent Committee responsible for evaluating applications and assigning marks, has, in fact, facilitated canvassing/lobbying rather than curbing it. C. Submissions on behalf of the High Court of Delhi 25. The learned advocate 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lar and timely designation must take place by conducting the process at fixed intervals. There must also be involvement of the Bar Council and independent legal experts in the Selection Committee, and peer review from fellow Advocates and views from all judges may be collected. Their submission is also to reduce subjectivity and bias in evaluations by reducing reliance on interviews and having a structured scoring 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 th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ectly informed and that the application was duly served on her advocate-on-record. She submitted that the IA was in the nature of a modification, which is different from a review of the judgment. 30. Accordingly, she submitted that this Court could only draw jurisdiction from paragraph 74 of Indira Jaising-I and make suitable additions/deletions. She submitted that for review of both the judgments, this Court would require 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-maki....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reflect who made arguments, what arguments were made, and judges may also sometimes add on to the arguments made while finally adjudicating the issue at hand. For this, Ms. Jaising submitted that supplying written submissions and the practice of recording the name of the Advocate making submissions in the judgment must be made mandatory. She contended that the quality of advocacy, rather than case outcomes, should be the decisive 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....designation of only the kith and kin of its members. I. Submissions of Applicants in IA 45959 of 2022 in 145730-31 of 2021 in MA 1502 Of 2020 in WP (C) 454 of 2015 43. Learned Senior Counsel for the intervenors supported the submissions of the learned Solicitor General. He relied on the judgement of this Court in the case of E.S. Reddy v. Chief Secretary, Govt. of Andhra Pradesh (1987) 3 SCC 258, wherein this Court observed that designation under 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 Cr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ocate makes an application before the 31st December, 1965, to the Bar Council maintaining the roll in which his name has been entered that he does not desire to continue as a Senior Advocate, the Bar Council may grant the application and the roll shall be altered accordingly." ( emphasis added ) 48. By the Act 60 of 1973, Sub-section (2) was amended. The words starting from 'standing' and ending with 'law' were incorporated by the Act 60 of 1973 with effect from 31st January, 1974, in place 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l be a facet of ability. (ii) Standing at the Bar 53. As far as the standing at the Bar is concerned, an Advocate can be said to have standing at the Bar provided he has certain qualities and a reputation which is built over a span of time. Standing at the Bar is not defined or understood with physical number of years an Advocate puts in. But the standing at the Bar is a mixture of several qualities of a professional viz: (i) integrity (ii) respect (iii) confidence (iv) dependability (v) honesty (vi) communication 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ontrary to the notions of diversity violating Articles 14, 15 and 21 and therefore, it is unconstitutional and null and void. As can be seen from paragraphs 23 and 24 of the decision in the said case, this Court found that there was no uniform criterion or yardstick adopted by the High Courts. In paragraph 23, this Court has noted the practice prevailing in this Court regarding the designation of Advocates as Senior Advocates. This Court, thereafter, referred to the practice followed in different High Courts. In paragraph 24, this Court held thus: "24. Insofar as the High 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 endeavou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....st strict process of scrutiny leaving no scope for any doubt or dissatisfaction in the matter." ( emphasis added ) 56.2 In paragraph 73 of the said decision, this Court held thus: "73. It is in the above backdrop that we proceed to venture into the exercise and lay down the following norms/guidelines which henceforth would 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." 57. It is obvious that an endeavour was made by this Court 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 wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g to the Court. A matter may be argued by a counsel who may be assisted by others, including an Advocate-on-Record. Thus, an assessment would have to be carried out in enquiring into the role played by the advocate in the matter they have appeared in with their role specified by them in their application. Merely looking into the number of appearances would not be enough. 34. We believe that this would also take care of any perceived disadvantages arising due to the larger number of appearances by Government Counsel, as compared to counsel who are engaged in private work. 35. One suggestion that we are inclined to accept is that while analysing the role of lawyers, the quality of the synopses filed 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er Article 142 were never intended to be final or understood as substitute to Statutory Rules under the Advocates Act. Paragraph 74 of Indira Jaising-1 and paragraph 51 of Indira Jaising-2 clearly contemplate that. This Court will have to make a course correction as expressed in paragraph 74 of Indira Jaising-1 again in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution. The submissions made by the learned Solicitor General of India, appearing for the Secretary General of this Court as well as in his personal capacity, High Courts of Delhi, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh and Punjab and Haryana, suggest that perhaps the directions issued in Indira Jaising-1 have not worked effectively to achieve the desired objectives. 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 Advocat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he observation is made in the contexts of the Statute and not on their desirability or competence to be the Members of the Permanent Committee. 64. The two senior members of the Bar who are part of the Permanent Committee have to interact with the applicants who have applied for designation. The applicants will be their colleagues in the profession. Normally, the two members of the Bar who are members of the Permanent Committee are expected to be of very high standing. Nevertheless, all the applicants have access to them. The learned Attorney General with experience at his command expressed that he is uncomfortable with the idea of interviews. The reason is that he found it embarrassing to ask questions as the applicants were his peers. 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 re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ieved by this Court. Moreover, the length of practice cannot be a rational criterion. On the contrary, it will help those who do not deserve designation as they will get points on the basis of the number of years in practice. (iii) Interview or Interaction 67. Now, we come to the interview or interaction of the Permanent Committee with the Advocates applying for designation. The question is whether an Advocate, who by virtue of his ability and standing at the Bar deserves designation, can be subjected to an interview by the Permanent Committee. When we posed this query to Ms. Indira Jaising, Senior Advocate, she fairly stated that while she argued Indira Jaising-1, she never suggested that there should be a requirement of an interview or interaction 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the applicant concerned, so as to assign points out of 50, which constitute ½ of the total points. 72. Three senior-most Judges of this Court or High Courts have onerous duties to discharge not only on the judicial side, but, on the administrative side as well. They have to devote hours together to administrative work. If they are required to assign points out of 50 on the basis of Judgments and written submissions, we wonder how many working hours will be required to go through the documents submitted by individual Advocates. We made a query to the learned Attorney General for India whether he could find time to go through so many judgments as well as publications submitted by the applicants. In his usual fairness, he was candid enough to tell the 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 i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Legislature never contemplated an Advocate making an application seeking designation. The scheme of Sub-section (2) of Section 16 indicates that designation has to be conferred by the Supreme Court or the High Courts. The scheme of Sub-section (2) of Section 16 indicates that an individual Judge of the Supreme Court or the High Court, as the case may be, cannot recommend any Advocate for designation as the decision is a collective decision of the Full Court. Even if an Advocate deserving of a designation does not apply for designation, on the basis of the discussion in the house, the Full Court can always recommend his/her designation, subject to his/her consent. For that purpose, the recommendation in writing of an individual Judge is not warranted. F. Whether Applications 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l cease to be inclusive. Income is one of the several factors to be considered. The requirement of a minimum practice of 10 years should be retained as the standing at the Bar can be assessed only if the Advocate has practiced for a reasonably long time. I. Secret Ballot 81. Another contentious issue is whether there should be a secret ballot in the Full House. In Full Court meetings, there is always an endeavour made to bring about consensus in decision-making on all subjects. But, where consensus cannot be arrived at notwithstanding best efforts, the decision-making must be in a democratic manner by majority vote. There cannot be any hard and fast rule laid down that the secret ballot should never be resorted to. It all depends on circumstances. Therefore, the question whether 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions, as the collection of data is very important for the correct decision-making process. While framing Rules, a proper framework can be provided for the working of the Permanent Secretariat and its duties. M. Need to Periodically Review the Procedure 86. The view which we have taken will be again subject to what is observed in paragraph 74 of the decision in the case of Indira Jaising-1 and paragraph 51 of the decision in the case of Indira Jaising-2. Looking to the very nature of the process of designation, it is very difficult to arrive at a perfect system. We learn from our experience and the mistakes committed in the past. Therefore, the endeavour of all stakeholders should be to keep on improving the system, so that we may ensure that not a single deserving Advocate is left out of the process of 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 deci....