The Supreme Court has dismissed the demand for preferential chambers for women lawyers. Justice Surya Kant emphasized that 60% of judicial officers are women, serving purely on merit, highlighting the need for modern, inclusive workspaces over special privileges.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The question of preferential allotment of lawyers’ chambers to women recently came up in the Supreme Court, which led to a discussion on merit, inclusivity, and the future of our judicial infrastructure. Justice Surya Kant offered a refreshing perspective, moving beyond token gestures to a vision of structural modernization.
Reflecting on the role of women in the judicial service, Justice Kant noted:
“In our judicial service, almost 60% of officers are women. They are here purely on merit, not reservation. So, it’s a bit paradoxical to ask for any special privilege. If we think of preferential allocation, we should also think of specially-abled persons, whom we welcome wholeheartedly into the profession.”
This raises a critical point: women in the legal profession are already thriving based on merit, and special privileges may not always be the right answer. The conversation also invites us to consider other groups, such as specially-abled lawyers, ensuring inclusivity is comprehensive, not selective.
Justice Kant went further, challenging the very idea of traditional lawyers’ chambers:
“Honestly, the concept of chambers should go. We should have modern workstations. In the new SC building, we are planning separate women’s bar rooms, office-bearers’ rooms, canteens, libraries, and escalators for specially-abled persons, all designed keeping the next 50 years in mind.”
ALSO READ: BREAKING| Delhi High Court Allows PFI to Challenge UAPA Ban
Case Title:
BHAKTI PASRIJA AND ORS. V UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
W.P.(C) No. 921/2025