Supreme Court to Hear Plea Challenging Senior Advocate Designations by Delhi High Court
The Supreme Court will hear a plea on January 2 challenging the Delhi High Court's designation of 70 senior advocates. Allegations include favoritism and constitutional violations.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India is scheduled to hear a plea on January 2, challenging the designation of 70 lawyers as senior advocates by the Delhi High Court.
The petition, filed by Mumbai-based advocate Mathew J. Nedumpara, seeks to quash the entire designation process, alleging that it is riddled with favoritism and unconstitutional practices.
Table of Contents
Key Details of the Plea
The matter will be heard by a bench of Justices B.R. Gavai and K.V. Viswanathan, as listed in the Supreme Court’s cause list. The petitioner argues that the designation process violates fundamental principles of equality and fairness, as enshrined in Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India.
Allegations Against the Designation Process
- Favoritism and Nepotism: The plea claims that the designation process is influenced by favoritism, nepotism, and extraneous considerations, creating an exclusive class of advocates.
- Unjust Classification: Nedumpara’s petition criticizes the separate dress code for senior advocates, comparing it to a form of “near apartheid” within the legal profession.
- Violation of Fundamental Rights: The plea contends that Sections 16 and 23(5) of the Advocates Act, 1961, along with the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, promote a special class of advocates with privileges unavailable to others, violating Articles 14 (equality before law), 19 (right to practice any profession), and 21 (right to life).
Historical Context: Dismissal of Similar Pleas
This is not the first time that the system of senior advocate designations has been challenged. In October 2023, the Supreme Court dismissed a similar plea filed by the same petitioner. The bench, led by then-Justice S.K. Kaul and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, ruled that the process of designating senior advocates was neither unreasonable nor violative of constitutional principles.
The court stated, “The system of designation of advocates as ‘senior’ cannot be said to be untenable or unreasonable under Article 14 of the Constitution.” The bench also criticized the petition as a “misadventure” and dismissed it without imposing any costs.
Concerns Over Senior Designation
Advocate Nedumpara has consistently argued that the designation system creates an elite class within the legal profession. According to him, these titles are often reserved for the “kith and kin of judges, senior advocates, politicians, and ministers,” leading to an unequal distribution of privileges in the legal community.
Privileges of Senior Advocates:
- A distinctive dress code.
- Preferential treatment in court proceedings.
- Enhanced professional status and opportunities.
The petitioner contends that such privileges are not only discriminatory but also detrimental to the broader legal community.
Legal Basis for Designation
The designation of senior advocates is governed by:
- Sections 16 and 23(5) of the Advocates Act, 1961: These sections outline the criteria and procedure for recognizing advocates as senior advocates.
- Supreme Court Rules, 2013: These rules further elaborate on the rights, privileges, and obligations of senior advocates.
Despite criticism, many legal experts argue that the designation system recognizes merit and contributes to the growth of the legal profession.
Also Read | Jobs in Supreme Court of India, Who Can Apply?
What Lies Ahead
The upcoming hearing will determine whether the Supreme Court sees merit in Nedumpara’s arguments or upholds its previous stance on the designation system. The bench’s decision could have far-reaching implications for the legal profession, potentially reshaping the process of senior advocate designations across India.
