The Supreme Court dismissed a writ petition filed by Senior Advocate Mathews J. Nedumpara challenging the senior designation system as elitist and unconstitutional. The Chief Justice observed that the plea was not maintainable and curtailed arguments, remarking, “enough spoken for social media!”
The Punjab and Haryana High Court, through its October 20, 2025 notification, has designated 76 advocates as Senior Advocates under Section 16(2) of the Advocates Act, 1961, acknowledging their legal expertise and distinguished standing at the Bar.
The Gujarat High Court has ruled that only advocates aged 45 and above can be designated as Senior Advocates, also directing them to mentor 2-3 young lawyers with less than three years of bar experience.
Supreme Court upholds Delhi High Court rule barring retired judges from other states from applying for senior advocate status. CJI tells petitioner: “Why don’t you apply to the Supreme Court… In the Supreme Court, everybody can apply.”
In the Religare ESOP case, the ED summoned Senior Advocate Pratap Venugopal over a legal opinion obtained by Care Health Insurance from Arvind Datar concerning ESOPs issued to ex-Religare chairperson Rashmi Saluja. Investigation continues.
Advocate Mathews J. Nedumpara petitioned the Supreme Court to reform the current collegium system and senior advocate designations, alleging favoritism and elitism. Despite being cautioned by the Chief Justice, he argued that the system unfairly benefits a small elite, violating constitutional rights. The petitioners demand an overhaul for enhanced judicial fairness and equality.
NEW DELHI: 4th April: The Supreme Court of India has suggested that the Delhi High Court should reconstitute its committee for Senior Advocate designations and conduct the process again. This new process should also include candidates whose applireconstitute its Senior Advocate design committeecations were rejected or deferred in the last round of selections in November 2024.
NEW DELHI: Senior Advocate Indira Jaising told the Supreme Court on Thursday that she does not support the idea of conducting interviews to designate lawyers as Senior Advocates. She clarified that she never made such a suggestion in 2017, yet the Supreme Court included an interview process in its judgment and assigned 25 marks for it.
NEW DELHI: Today, 19th March, The Supreme Court of India is re-evaluating its 2017 ruling in Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court, which had established guidelines for designating lawyers as Senior Advocates. A special bench comprising Justices AS Oka, Ujjal Bhuyan, and SVN Bhatti is hearing the matter, with Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta appearing for the Supreme Court’s administrative side.
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. 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.
