Today, On 27th January, The Supreme Court refused to entertain a plea seeking SC/ST reservation in Bar Councils, saying petitioners must approach authorities first. “Just because Court did something for women, you come! You just want it on a platter!” Bench remarked.
Today, On 8th January, The Supreme Court has deferred to January 13 the hearing on petitions challenging the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls. The pleas question the legality and transparency of the EC’s SIR process ahead of upcoming elections.
Today, On 6th December, Supreme Court rescheduled the Special Intensive Revision hearing for tomorrow. Senior Advocate Dwivedi highlighted the Election Commission’s powers and citizen-centric constitutional provisions, while CJI noted, “If we are able to take up at 12 then we will continue till lunch.”
The Delhi High Court directs Centre to verify claims that lawyers appointed to represent the government in the Supreme Court are yet to clear the AIBE. The Court heard a PIL challenging appointment of 650 lawyers for the Union.
Today, On 26th November, Supreme Court responded to a PIL seeking proportional representation of women, queer individuals, lawyers with disabilities, and members of marginalized communities in the Bar Council of India and State Bar Councils. The court has now issued notice in the matter.
A new PIL filed by Advocate Yogamaya MG urges the Supreme Court to ensure fair representation of women, queer persons, and marginalized lawyers in Bar Councils. The plea highlights that only nine out of 441 council members are women, calling it a “deeply entrenched imbalance.”
The Supreme Court has issued notice on a PIL seeking reservation for women advocates in State Bar Councils, aiming to address their under-representation in bar leadership and promote gender equality within India’s legal profession.
The Supreme Court has issued notice to the UP Bar Council for demanding Rs 14,000 from new advocates under “certificate of practice,” calling it a clear conflict with its 2024 ruling in Gaurav Kumar v. Union of India. The Court said Bar Councils cannot charge beyond the statutory enrolment fee.
The Supreme Court asked BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra to assist in checking compliance with the enrolment fee cap, saying, “We are not inclined to issue notice, but want BCI’s response to examine compliance with para 109.”
Today, On 19th May, The Supreme Court has now asked the Bar Council of India to respond to a PIL challenging the Rs.3,500 fee for the AIBE. Earlier in February, the Court declined to hear the PIL but allowed a representation to BCI.
