CJI Bars Senior Advocates from Mentioning, Paving Way for Juniors in Apex Court

NEW DELHI — In a significant procedural overhaul aimed at fostering opportunities for younger members of the Bar, the Supreme Court of India has barred designated Senior Advocates from mentioning cases for urgent listing before the court of the Chief Justice. The new directive, which takes effect from Monday, August 11, 2025, represents a decisive step by Chief Justice of India (CJI) B.R. Gavai to level the playing field during the crucial opening minutes of the court's daily proceedings.

A notice issued by the Supreme Court registry over the weekend formalized the change. "As directed, designated senior counsels are not permitted to mention any case/s before the court of the Chief Justice of India with effect from Monday, August 11, 2025," the official communication stated, leaving no room for ambiguity.

The move follows a clear announcement made by CJI Gavai in open court on August 6, 2025. Signaling his intention to champion the cause of junior lawyers, the Chief Justice had declared, "From Monday, no senior counsel, I mean designated senior counsel, will be allowed to mention matters. Let juniors get an opportunity to do it."

This policy shift is not just a procedural tweak but a move laden with significance for the legal profession, addressing a long-standing debate about access and opportunity within the corridors of the nation's highest court.

The Practice of 'Mentioning' and its Significance

In the Supreme Court, the practice of "mentioning" is a critical, time-sensitive process. At the commencement of the day's proceedings, lawyers make brief oral submissions before the CJI-led bench, pleading for their cases to be listed out of turn due to urgency. Securing an urgent hearing can be pivotal, often determining the immediate fate of matters involving personal liberty, impending demolitions, policy deadlines, or other time-critical issues.

Historically, the mentioning slot has been dominated by Senior Advocates. Their experience, stature, and familiarity with the bench have often been perceived as providing an advantage in persuading the court of a matter's urgency. This has led to concerns that junior advocates and Advocates-on-Record (AORs), who are often more intimately involved with the case file from its inception, are crowded out of this vital advocacy opportunity.

CJI Gavai acknowledged this sentiment directly, noting on August 6 that "there is a great demand that no matters should be mentioned by senior counsel(s)." His new rule directly addresses this demand, mandating that the responsibility for mentioning must now fall to junior members of the legal team.

A Reversal of Precedent and a New Direction

The decision also marks a notable departure from the practice instituted by CJI Gavai's immediate predecessor, Justice Sanjiv Khanna. During his tenure, Justice Khanna had discontinued the traditional system of oral mentioning altogether, directing lawyers to submit requests for urgent hearings through a more streamlined, non-discretionary process of emails and written letters. This was seen as an attempt to create a more objective and less chaotic system.

However, upon assuming office on May 14, 2025, CJI Gavai promptly reinstated the practice of oral mentioning, signaling a return to traditional court craft. His latest directive refines this reinstated practice, retaining the oral advocacy element but reshaping who gets to participate. By doing so, he seeks to blend the tradition of oral submission with a progressive agenda of empowering junior lawyers.

The Chief Justice has clarified that this new rule is, for now, specific to his own court. "This will be practised at least in my court," he stated, adding that it was up to his brother and sister judges on other benches to decide whether to adopt a similar practice. This allows for a period of observation, where the legal community can assess the effectiveness and impact of the change in the crucible of Court No. 1.

Implications for the Legal Profession

The directive has been met with a mix of reactions from the legal fraternity. Many junior advocates have hailed it as a landmark move that will provide them with invaluable experience and visibility before the highest court. It offers a platform to hone their advocacy skills, build confidence, and make a name for themselves in a highly competitive environment. For them, the opportunity to articulate the urgency of a case directly to the CJI is a significant professional milestone.

For Senior Advocates, the change necessitates a recalibration of their role in the initial stages of urgent matters. While their expertise in drafting, strategy, and final arguments remains indispensable, the task of securing the first hearing will now be delegated. This could foster a more collaborative dynamic within legal teams, requiring seniors to mentor their juniors more closely on the nuances of mentioning.

The move also carries potential challenges. Senior Advocates often bring a practiced brevity and precision to mentioning, honed over decades. They are typically adept at crystallizing the core urgency of a complex case into a few compelling sentences, a skill that is crucial when the court's time is limited. Junior lawyers will need to quickly develop this specialized skill to ensure their clients' matters are effectively presented.

Furthermore, the policy could be seen as an informal push towards decentralizing skills and responsibilities within the profession. It subtly challenges the notion that a senior's presence is mandatory for every critical court interaction and reinforces the status and capability of Advocates-on-Record and other junior counsel who form the backbone of Supreme Court litigation.

This decision by CJI Gavai is more than a logistical change; it is a statement of judicial philosophy. It reflects a commitment to nurturing the next generation of legal talent and ensuring that the opportunities for advocacy are more equitably distributed. As the legal community adapts to this new norm in the CJI's court, its impact on the efficiency of mentioning, the quality of submissions, and the professional development of young lawyers will be closely watched by all stakeholders in the Indian justice system.