Institute of Legal and Management Studies

In the judgment discarding points-based system in the senior designation process, the Supreme Court emphasised that lawyers practicing in Trial and District Courts and before specialised Tribunals must be considered for designation as Senior Advocates.

A bench of Justice Abhay Oka, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, and Justice SVN Bhatti observed that their role is “no inferior” to the role played by Advocates practicing before the High Courts and the Supreme Court, and this inclusion is an essential part of ensuring diversity in the designation process.

“When we talk of diversity, we must ensure that the High Courts evolve a mechanism by which the members of the Bar practicing in our Trial and District Judiciary and before specialised Tribunals are considered for designation as their role is no inferior to the role played by Advocates practicing before this Court and High Courts”, the Court stated.

The Court suggested that High Courts can seek the views of Principal District Judges or Heads of Tribunals when considering the applications of such Advocates. It also noted that the views of the Guardian or Administrative Judges of the concerned District would be available in such cases.

The Court agreed with the submissions made by Senior Advocate Indira Jaising on the need for greater inclusivity and diversity in the designation process.

It observed, “Ms. Indira Jaising is absolutely correct when she candidly submitted that the designation cannot be the monopoly of the selected few. She submitted that diversity is of great deal of importance. All members of the Bar who belong to different classes must get equal opportunity in the matter of designation. It is important to encourage first generation Advocates.”

The Court also said that the senior designation process must be objectively fair and guided, and to that end, at least one exercise of designation must be conducted every year.

On the issue of eligibility criteria, the Court said that a condition of minimum income should not be introduced, as it would make the process non-inclusive. It noted that income is one of several factors to be considered. However, it upheld the requirement of a minimum of ten years of practice, stating that the standing at the Bar can be assessed only if an Advocate has practiced for a reasonably long time.

The Court also recorded Jaising's argument that the practice of Senior Advocates using different gowns has no basis in the Advocates Act and therefore ought to be discontinued. However, it left the decision on this issue to the High Courts while framing their rules of the process of senior advocate designation.

Case no. – Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 4299/2024

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 555

Case Title – Jitender @ Kalla v. State (Govt.) of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment