On February 20, the Supreme Court remarked that “a serious introspection” was needed regarding the designation process and referred the matter to Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna to decide if a larger bench should examine the issue.
NEW DELHI: Today, 18th March: The process of designating Senior Advocates is under review as four High Courts—Delhi, Karnataka, Punjab & Haryana, and Patna—have given their suggestions to the Supreme Court.
ALSO READ: “Senior Advocate Designation Method Needs Reconsideration”: SG Tushar Mehta to SC
The current system, which was set by the Supreme Court in the 2017 case of Indira Jaising vs. Supreme Court, is now being reconsidered for improvements.
A three-judge bench of Justices Abhay S Oka, Ujjal Bhuyan, and SVN Bhatti had asked all High Courts and other stakeholders to submit their opinions on changing the current method of conferring senior designations.
On February 20, the Supreme Court remarked that “a serious introspection” was needed regarding the designation process and referred the matter to Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna to decide if a larger bench should examine the issue.
Here are the key suggestions made by each of the four High Courts:
Delhi High Court’s Suggestions
- The point-based evaluation and Permanent Committee for assessment should be removed.
- Senior Advocate designation should be conferred, not applied for.
- The proposal for designation can be initiated by:
- The Chief Justice of the High Court
- Any two sitting judges of the High Court
- Any two designated Senior Advocates with over five years’ standing after designation (but a Senior Advocate can only recommend one person per year; any second proposal in the same year will be invalid).
- The final designation should be decided through secret ballot by the full court.
- A lawyer needs at least 3/4th of the votes from those present and voting for their designation to be approved.
Karnataka High Court’s Suggestions
- The current point system should be modified:
- Judgments: 50 points reduced to 35 points
- Personality & Suitability (interview-based): 25 points reduced to 20 points
- Integrity: 20 points to remain unchanged
- Income criteria should be relaxed for women advocates.
- The Selection Committee should include only sitting High Court judges and Senior Advocates who have deep knowledge of the Bar.
- Lawyers must give their consent before being designated as Senior Advocates.
- Active court practice should be mandatory; just having theoretical knowledge should not be enough.
- The requirement of publishing articles for points should be removed, as active practitioners do not have time for writing publications.
These recommendations were given by a panel consisting of Justice Anu Sivaraman, Karnataka Advocate General Shashi Kiran Shetty, and Senior Advocate Uday Holla.
Punjab & Haryana High Court’s Suggestions
- A lawyer’s standing should not be judged only by their past case judgments, published articles, or books, or by a brief interview.
- Evaluation should be based on courtroom performance, which reflects:
- Fairness
- Spontaneity
- Demeanor
- Articulation
- Clarity
- Legal knowledge
- The Senior Advocate designation should not be restricted to lawyers practicing in the Supreme Court and High Courts; it should also be extended to trial courts.
- High Courts should retain full discretion in deciding who gets designated, without being bound by rigid parameters.
Patna High Court’s Suggestions
The Patna High Court did not submit specific suggestions because it is already in the process of amending its rules under the High Court of Judicature at Patna (Designation of Senior Advocates) Rules, 2019, in accordance with the Supreme Court’s Guidelines for Designation of Senior Advocates (dated July 17, 2023).
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
