The Supreme Court has rebuked the Bar Council of India (BCI) for refusing travel allowances and honorarium to retired judges supervising Bar Council elections, questioning how they are expected to cover expenses personally and warning against non-compliance with court directives.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India has questioned the Bar Council of India (BCI) over its failure to provide adequate honorarium and travel allowances to retired High Court judges appointed to oversee State Bar Council elections.
The matter came up before a bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justice R. Mahadevan and Justice Joymalya Bagchi. Senior Advocate V Giri, a member of the Supreme Court-appointed High-Powered Election Supervisory Committee, mentioned it orally.
Senior Advocate V Giri highlighted that the BCI resisted proposals to provide a reasonable honorarium to former Chief Justices and judges tasked with supervising State Bar Council elections, citing financial constraints.
Giri stated that the honorarium must match the stature of the committee members, who are former High Court Chief Justices and Judges. He also requested that the Court either pass suitable orders or authorize Justice (Retd.) Sudhanshu Dhulia to take necessary action.
The Bench expressed disapproval and questioned the BCI’s stance, especially since the Council had previously fixed election fees on the ground that it would generate sufficient funds for conducting elections.
The Court questioned how retired judges were expected to manage election-related expenses themselves, including travel bookings and accommodation.
The bench remarked,
“What they will do? Do they have their own aircraft?”
The Court also noted reports that committee members were being forced to make travel bookings from their own pockets and were provided substandard facilities during election supervision.
Giri also raised another issue: the BCI independently formed a committee for the Rajasthan Bar Council elections, despite a Supreme Court order constituting court-monitored election committees across States.
The BCI argued that Rajasthan was not mentioned in the November 18, 2024 order. However, the Court questioned why the state was excluded and why a separate committee was formed without informing the Court.
The Supreme Court directed the BCI to file a response by the next day, warning the Council not to invite coercive orders. The Court asked the BCI to explain:
- Why was a separate committee formed for the Rajasthan Bar Council elections
- Why the BCI failed to provide adequate honorarium and travel allowances to retired judges
The Court’s action highlights its intent to ensure free, fair, and dignified conduct of Bar Council elections nationwide.
Earlier, on September 24, 2024, the Supreme Court directed the conduct of elections in Bar Councils where elections were due. Subsequently, on November 18, 2024, the Court constituted High-Powered Election Committees headed by former High Court Chief Justices and comprising former High Court judges to monitor each State Bar Council election.
In addition, a High-Powered Election Supervisory Committee was formed, including:
- Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia
- Justice Ravi Shankar Jha
- Senior Advocate V Giri
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Bar Council Elections