indira jaising senior advocate judgment
senior advocate designation guidelines 2017
supreme court senior advocate rules india
senior advocate appointment process india
constitutional challenge to advocate designation
Case Summary: Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India
Citation: (2017) 9 SCC 766 | AIR 2017 SC 5017
Date of Decision: 12 October 2017
Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench: Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman, Justice Navin Sinha
Case No: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 454 of 2015
[Judgment Source] https://www.courtkutchehry.com/Judgement/Search/AdvancedV2?docid=2361619
Law Points Raised:
- Whether the existing process of designating Senior Advocates in the Supreme Court violates Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution.
- Whether Section 16 of the Advocates Act, 1961 and related Supreme Court rules need to be revisited for procedural fairness and transparency.
- Need for establishing a structured, objective, and transparent system for Senior Advocate designation.
- Inclusion of diverse legal practitioners and PIL lawyers through a merit-based evaluation system.
- Challenges to the constitutional validity of rules across High Courts related to Senior Advocate appointments.
Ratio Decidendi:
- The Court acknowledged that the system of designating Senior Advocates lacked transparency, fairness, and uniform standards.
- Held that designation should not be arbitrary and must adhere to constitutional values of equality and merit.
- The process of designation must incorporate measurable criteria and institutional safeguards to prevent bias.
- The Supreme Court is empowered under Article 145 to frame guidelines that ensure fairness in judicial appointments and designations.
Final Ruling:
The Supreme Court accepted the need for reform and laid down comprehensive guidelines for the designation of Senior Advocates. A Permanent Committee comprising senior judges, Attorney General, and members from the Bar was directed to be formed. The process would include interviews, objective assessment on a 100-point scale, and public notice of applications. The ruling aims to institutionalize a transparent and merit-based system respecting diversity and judicial integrity.
Key Paragraph References:
- ¶ 1–3 – Petitioner’s plea and connected cases raising constitutional challenges
- ¶ 5–7 – Historical background of the Senior Advocate classification
- ¶ 15 onward – Consideration of intervention petitions and constitutional implications
- Final Directions – Guidelines framed by the Court on Senior Advocate designation