Designation of senior advocates at courts

Why in news?

• The Central government is seeking to change guidelines for the designation of senior lawyers.
• These guidelines were issued by the Supreme Court in the aftermath of its 2017 ruling in the case of ‘Indira Jaising vs. Union of India’.

More about the News:

• Center says that the current requirements for designation are arbitrary and have resulted in ousting of otherwise eligible candidates.
• The point-based system, which awards 40% weightage to publications, personality and suitability, is subjective, ineffective, and dilutes the esteem and dignity of the honour.
• The application seeks to reinstate the rule of a simple majority by a secret ballot, where the judges can express their views about the suitability of any candidate.

Procedure followed before 2017 ruling:

• The Advocates Act, 1961 states two classes of advocates
  • Senior advocates and other advocates.
• A senior advocate must be a deserving candidate in the opinion of the SC or an HC.  It was the Chief Justice and the judges who designated an advocate as a ‘senior’ advocate.

Guidelines laid down in Indira Jaising case:

• India’s first woman Senior Advocate Indira Jaising filed a petition in SC challenging the existing process of designation of senior advocate. She termed this process as opaque, arbitrary and fraught with nepotism and sought greater transparency in the process of designating.
• As a result, the Supreme Court decided to lay down guidelines for itself and all High Courts on the process of designating senior advocates.
• The guidelines provide for the setting up of a Permanent Committee and a Permanent Secretariat.
  • Permanent Secretariat
    • It will be a body tasked with receiving and compiling all applications for designation with relevant data.
    • The secretariat forwards these proposals to the permanent committee for scrutiny.
  • Permanent Committee
    • The committee then interviews the candidate and makes an overall evaluation based on years of practice, pro-bono work undertaken, judgments, publications, and a personality test.
    • The CJI-chaired committee was to consist of two senior-most SC judges, the Attorney General of India, and a member of the Bar Council nominated by the chair and other members.
• Once a candidate’s name is approved, it will be forwarded to the Full Court to decide on the basis of the majority.
• If the candidate gets the apt votes, then she/he is allowed to be designated as a senior advocate but if rejected then the applicant can send the application again only after the lapse of two years. The Full Court can also recall the designation of a senior advocate.

Privileges and restrictions of Senior Advocates:

• Senior advocates enjoy a suite of privileges and few restrictions.
• They have a right of pre-audience in courtrooms.
• They do not file cases or handle legal paperwork; they only argue.
• And the law bars them from entertaining litigants directly. Instead, clients come through briefing counsels who act as go-betweens
• A senior advocate is not entitled to appear without an Advocate-on-Record in the Supreme Court or without a junior in any other court or tribunal in India.
• He is also not entitled to accept instructions to draw pleadings or affidavits, advice on evidence or do any drafting work of an analogous kind in any court or tribunal in India or undertake conveyancing work of any kind whatsoever but this prohibition shall not extend to settling any such matter as aforesaid in consultation with a junior.

PRACTICE QUESTION:

Consider the following statements:

1. A senior advocate is not entitled to appear without an Advocate-on-Record in the Supreme Court

2. A senor advocate is designated through a voting process in the courts

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 only

(c) Both 1 and 2

(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Answer