New Delhi: Last Wednesday, Chief Justice of India (CJI) NV Ramana refused permission to senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi to mention a matter before the Supreme Court.
Strongly opposing the practice of senior advocates mentioning matters before him, the Chief Justice said, “Sorry, Mr. Singhvi. I do not entertain seniors. I want to put an end to the senior business.”
Soon after, senior advocate Kapil Sibal also tried to mention a matter. To this, Justice Ramana replied in a similar period: “Mr Sibal, this applies to you as well.”
He then remarked that he was receiving concerns from junior lawyers, requesting the court to do away with the practice of allowing senior advocates to refer.
As a master of the roster, the CJI can consider requests of lawyers to list them in turn, without waiting for the Registry to list them in the normal order. If the CJI feels that a matter needs urgent hearing, he directs it to be listed immediately.
Urgent mention in court refers to a short oral petition before the SC Registry or Bench, in which ‘instant listing‘ Of one thing. Mention is often used as a tool in building demolition, floor test, bail, and other time-sensitive matters.
Justice Ramana’s outrage against the practice of senior advocates citing cases is not the first time a sitting Chief Justice has objected to the trend. However, lawyers spoke to ThePrint and said that the problem was with the way the SC Registry listed cases, the Advocates on Record (AOR) was forced to appoint seniors to refer the cases.
below Supreme Court rules, only one AOR can appear, argue and address the Supreme Court. However, a non-AOR lawyer, whether senior or junior, can appear in the apex court with the permission of the AOR.
To become an AOR in the apex court, it is necessary to practice as an advocate for at least four years, undergo one year training under a senior advocate and pass the AOR exam administered by the Supreme Court.
A senior advocate is an advocate who is given the title of “senior” by the full court of the Supreme Court, which includes all the sitting judges of the top court. However, a designated senior counsel cannot appear without the Briefing Council and the AOR.
Read also: 20 Years Fight For Rs 20 – Lawyer Who Sued And Wins Railways Says It Wasn’t Just About Money
Similar concerns raised in 2014 and 2017
In 2017, a group of advocates had complained that senior advocates were squandering the possibility of getting immediate dates for hearing. Due to this, the then CJI Dipak Misra had stayed the mention by senior advocates. This was done after advocate PV Dinesh raised the issue before him.
“We, the junior lawyers, have been waiting for 20 minutes to mention our cases, but when our turn comes, my lord is refusing to hear us. All the senior advocates were mentioning earlier and we have not got any opportunity. Will the litigants who can’t afford senior lawyers not get a chance?” Dinesh asked.
Justice Misra had then said, “Only advocates will mention it on record.”
Earlier in 2014, Justice RM Lodha, as CJI-nominated, was raised similar concerns, Days before being sworn in as the 41st CJI of India, Justice Lodha had reprimanded senior advocates for referring matters and barred them from doing so during his tenure.
Senior advocate Vikas Singh, president of the Supreme Court Bar Association, told ThePrint that the problem was with the system of listing cases.
“The problem is not that seniors want to refer matters. Sometimes, matters are so high stakes that you wish a senior would clarify them. A senior advocate cannot appear without a junior lawyer. If the Chief Justice is liberal in mentioning, then no senior is inclined to mention any matter,” he said.
Advocate Pranav Sachdeva also pointed out the problem of listing of cases. “The system of listing cases in the Supreme Court is broken and new cases are not listed together for months, especially those considered sensitive.”
According to Sachdeva, the Registry has immense discretion during the first and subsequent listing of cases.
“In cases of final hearing, some are listed immediately, while others have to wait for years. No court in the world gives such great discretion to its registry officers who then act in an opaque manner,” he said.
(Edited by Siddharth Muraleedharan)
Read also: CJI blames judicial vacancies for backlog of cases, Rijiju promises to reduce pendency in 2 years