Point of Law: Conferment of status of 'Senior Advocate' to an 'Advocate' is not a matter of right. It is a recognition by Court to the legal knowledge, high degree of Advocacy, manner of presentation in Court and other relevant considerations which are cumulatively considered to confer the status of 'Senior Advocate' upon an Advocate

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Tripathi, Advocate in person and Sri Ashish Mishra, learned counsel for respondents.

2. Petitioner, a practicing Advocate in this Court, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India challenging notification dated 20.05.2019 issued by Registrar General of this Court under Section 16(2) of Advocates Act 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act, 1961') designating 75 Advocates' as 'Senior Advocates' with effect from 18.05.2019.

3. Facts, in brief, giving rise to the present writ petition are that petitioner obtained degree of L.L.B. from Banaras Hindu University and thereafter registered with Bar Counsel of Uttar Pradesh vide Enrollment No. U.P. 607 dated 12.03.1977. He claims that since then he is continuously practicing in this Court. However, he was registered as Member of High Court Bar Association on 15.01.2001.

4. Issue with regard to designation of Senior Advocates under Section 16 of Act, 1961 came up before Supreme Court in Indira Jaising Vs Supreme Court of India (2017) 9 SCC 766, Court laid down certain norms/guidelines with a direction to modify Rules relating to designation of 'Senior Advocates' by respective Courts. Directions/guidelines contained in para 73 of judgment read as under:

“73. It is in the above backdrop that we proceed to venture into the exercise and lay down the following norms/guidelines which henceforth would govern the exercise of designation of Senior Advocates by the Supreme Court and all High Courts in the country. The norms/guidelines, in existence, shall be suitably modified so as to be in accord with the present.

73.1 All matters relating to designation of Senior Advocates in the Supreme Court of India and in all the High Courts of the country shall be dealt with by a Permanent Committee to be known as “Committee for Designation of Senior Advocates”;

73.2 The Permanent Committee will be headed by the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India and consist of two senior most Judges of the Supreme Court of India [or High Court(s), as may be]; the learned Attorney General for India (Advocate General of the State in case of a High Court) will be a Member of the Permanent Committee. The above four Members of the Permanent Committee will nominate another Member of the Bar to be the fifth Member of the Permanent Committee;

73.3 The said Committee shall have a permanent Secretariat, the composition of which will be decided by the Chief Justice of India or the Chief Justices of the High Courts, as may be, in consultation with the other Members of the Permanent Committee;

73.4 All applications including written proposals by the Hon'ble Judges will be submitted to the Secretariat. On receipt of such applications or proposals from Hon'ble Judges, the Secretariat will compile the relevant data and information with regard to the reputation, conduct, integrity of the advocates(s) concerned including his/her participation in pro bono work; reported judgments in which the advocates concerned had appeared; the number of such judgments for the last five years. The sources from which information/data will be sought and collected by the Secretariat will be as decided by the Permanent Committee

73.5 The Secretariat will publish the proposal of designation of a particular advocate in the official website of the Court concerned inviting the suggestions/views of other stakeholders in the proposed designation;

73.6 After the database in terms of the above is compiled and all such information as may be specifically directed by the Permanent Committee to be obtained in respect of any particular candidate is collected, the Secretariat shall put up the case before the Permanent Committee for scrutiny;

73.7 The Permanent Committee will examine each case in the light of the data provided by the Secretariat of the Permanent Committee; interview the advocate concerned; and make it