Rajasthan and AP High Court Advocates' Associations join others in decrying SCBA statements on merit of HC lawyers

The High Court Advocates' Associations of Rajasthan and Andhra Pradesh have written to Chief Justice of India NV Ramana and Supreme Court Bar Association President Vikas Singh, expressing their disapproval of the comments made by the latter regarding the merit of High Court lawyers..The overlapping theme in the representations sent by the two Associations is their objection to the claim by the SCBA President that lawyers practicing before the Supreme Court are more meritorious than their colleagues practicing before various High Courts..[UPDATE] SCBA claims CJI NV Ramana agreed to proposal to elevate Supreme Court lawyers as High Court judges; Not confirmed by CJI office.In a letter by President Nathu Singh Rathore, the Rajasthan High Court Advocate’s Association opposed the appointment of judges by way of the proposed method, insisting that the same would be contrary to the spirit of the Constitution..Further, raising objection to statements made by the SCBA President, the letter read,“The land of Rajasthan might be arid in ecological conditions, but there is no drought of talented, competent, and meritorious lawyers/people here. The Rajasthan High Court has produced numerous jurists, who presided as Chief Justices of various High Courts, judges of Hon’ble Supreme Court and Judge of the ICJ as well.”."No dearth of talented, competent, meritorious lawyers in High Courts:" DHCBA writes to CJI NV Ramana against SCBA proposal.The Andhra Pradesh Advocates’ Association's representation pointed out the fallacies of a “search committee” constituted to identify Supreme Court lawyers deserving of elevation, saying,“...elevation to the High Courts, requires a high level of deliberations in the absence of judicial precedents or statutory guidance or constitutional approval; The self-styled ‘Search Committee’ constituted to make such recommendations is objectionable for the sole reason that a private body of lawyers (SCBA) cannot institutionalise the recommendation process and be a participant.”.The letter further quoted the Supreme Court's judgment in the Second Judges Case, (Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association and Ors v. Union of India) that established that the process of appointment of judges to the High Court is an integrated participatory consultative process for selecting the best and most suitable persons available for appointment..Karnataka lawyer asks SCBA President Vikas Singh to withdraw comment on Supreme Court lawyers being more "meritorious" than High Court lawyers.It went on to condemn and call for a withdrawal of the comments by the SCBA regarding the competency of lawyers practicing in the High Courts.“It must be understood that the hierarchy of Courts does not signify the levels of merit and it is only depending on individual interest, convenience and various other factors. Further, there is no dearth of eligible and efficient Advocates on the rolls of High Courts. The said assertions also have an impact on general public having an adverse effect on the Advocate community.”.These letters come shortly after lawyers bodies from across the country wrote to the SCBA and Chief Justice NV Ramana regarding similar concerns..Statement by SCBA derogatory to High Court lawyers, withdraw it: Bar Association of Calcutta High Court writes to SCBA President, CJI NV Ramana.Singh has since responded to the missives sent by various associations, clarifying that there was no intention to cast any aspersions on the competence of High Court lawyers."Reference to Supreme Court lawyers being 'more meritorious' in my letter to the Chief Justice of India was for the limited purpose of ensuring their consideration for elevation by the High Court collegiums on equal footing basis and there was no intention whatsoever to cast any aspersion on the lawyers practicing in different High Courts," Singh said in his clarification..[Read Letters Here]