Breaking: SCBA membership mandatory for Chamber Allotment in Supreme Court, holds SC

The Supreme Court today upheld the condition prescribed in Supreme Court Lawyers’ Chambers (Allotment and Occupancy) Rules (Allotment Rules) which prescribes that membership of Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) is mandatory for getting chamber allotted in Supreme Court..The judgment was delivered by a Bench of Justices AK Sikri and Ashok Bhushan in a slew of petitions challenging various provisions of the Rules..SCBA Membership as a criterion.The validity of condition of membership of SCBA is contained in Rule 3 of the Allotment Rules..The said Rule was challenged by advocate V Shyam Mohan on the ground that it violates of Articles 14, 19(1)(c) and 19(1) (g) of the Constitution..Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for Shyam Mohan, had submitted that the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) is also a represented body like SCBA and, therefore, membership of any one of these bodies should be enough for making a person eligible to be considered for allotment of chambers. It was argued that SCAORA was also a vibrant body which was formed for the welfare of AORs. Therefore, the measure in the allotment of Lawyers’ Chambers Rules that restricts eligibility for allotment of chambers to members of the SCBA and excludes those who are members only of the SCAORA is manifestly arbitrary..It was also submitted that such a classification that excludes the association of those advocates as prescribed under Article 145(1) (a) of the Constitution of India read with the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 is unreasonable and has no rational nexus with the object sought to be achieved, i.e., the allotment of chambers to the regular practitioners of the Supreme Court..Senior Counsel Vikas Singh and Additional Solicitor General Maninder Singh had, however, defended the above Rule stating that SCBA is an umbrella association which represents the interests of all its members. Membership of SCBA was open to all advocates, irrespective of their category, namely, Senior Advocates, advocates, AOR as well as other advocates. It was also argued that it is a representative body for all the members..Importantly, they drew the attention of the Court to Rule 4 of the Rules and Regulations of SCAORA as per which membership of SCBA was a pre-condition for becoming a member of SCAORA..The Court, adverting to the said Rule 4 cited by Vikas Singh and Maninder Singh, held that the entire edifice of the petitioner’s case stands demolished due to that..The petitioners have submitted that members of SCAORA should be treated as sufficient eligibility for allotment of chambers. Yet, in order to become a member of SCAORA, as per Rule 4 of the Rules and Regulations of SCAORA itself, an advocate has to be a member of SCBA. Therefore, unless an advocate is an AOR and also a member of SCBA, he cannot become a member of SCAORA. This requirement itself accepts the position that SCBA is an umbrella organisation and also recognises the vital role it plays. Thus, the argument based on Article 14 of the Constitution would be of no avail, the Court held..Residence in Delhi.Another provision which was challenged was the prescription of the requirement of residence in Delhi or New Delhi..In this regard, it was submitted by the petitioner that there is no rationale in prescribing the condition that an advocate to become eligible for allotment of a chamber should be a resident in Delhi or New Delhi. The argument was that in last few years, there was exponential growth in the population of Delhi which necessitated people to shift in areas nearby, like Noida or Ghaziabad in Uttar Pradesh, Faridabad or Gurugram in Haryana. It was submitted that the only purpose for making the aforesaid provision was that the advocate who is practicing in Supreme Court is readily available..The Court accepted the same, opining that having regard to the changed circumstances and the manner in which areas around Delhi have developed in past few years, many advocates who appear in courts in Delhi, including the Supreme Court, commute on a daily basis from their residences which fall in neighbouring States..Thus, it held that it is time to reconsider as to whether the requirement of residence in Delhi or New Delhi in Rule 3 of the Allotment Rules needs to be retained or it should be extended to some areas of neighbouring States which are quite close to the vicinity of the Supreme Court..The Court directed the Judges’ Allotment Committee to take a decision on this aspect..Changes to Block period and other prayers.Another major issue dealt with by the Court was with regard to the changes in the block period. Notice dated May 16, 2018 mentioned the block period from June 01, 2011 to June 30, 2016. Different petitioners suggested different block periods..Prayers were also made regarding requirements pertaining to number of appearances, and extension of cut-off date..ASG Maninder Singh had submitted a note proposing the solution to various issues. Some of the suggestions made by Maninder Singh in the note were accepted by the Court. They are as follows:.– The consideration of the request for allotment of chambers to the members of SCBA belonging to all the 3 categories should be for all those who fulfill individual respective criteria in the above mentioned 3 categories by September 30, 2018..– In other words, any member advocate, who fulfills the requirement of 50 appearances per year by 30th September, 2018, would become entitled for submitting an application for allotment of chamber to the Registry of the Supreme Court and every such application shall be accepted. The Registry would consider a period of 730 days (a continuous period of 2 years) at any time before 30th September, 2018 and on being satisfied of the fulfilment of the relevant criteria, shall accept the application for consideration of allotment of chamber..– Similarly, for all Member AORs who wish to submit their application by 30.9.2018 would be required to fulfil minimum of 20 filings or 50 appearances in a period of one year for two years, would have to satisfy the Registry of minimum 40 filings or 100 appearances in a period of 730 days of any period as on 30th September, 2018. Such applications would also be accepted by the Registry of the Supreme Court for allotment of chambers. It is clarified that the submission of application for allotment of a chamber by a member of the SCBA can be on any of the criteria for eligibility chosen by the concerned member. In that, notwithstanding that the member is an AOR or a designated Sr. Advocate, the application for allotment of chamber can be submitted on any of the criteria, namely, criteria of eligibility for non-AOR, criteria for eligibility of AOR and criteria for eligibility of a Sr. Advocate. However, the allotment of chamber to any such member shall be from the quota of 7:10 or 2:10 or 1:10, as the case may be, on the basis of the status held by the member in presenti..– Similarly, this cut-off date of September 30, 2018 would apply to the category of Member Senior Advocates for applying, with the criteria for that category..– In relation to all those Member Advocates who have already lodged/submitted their applications for allotment of chambers as advocate (Non-AOR) on the basis of the criteria of 50 appearances in a given year for 2 years and have now qualified in the AOR examination, they shall be held to be eligible for allotment of chambers in the AOR category and the allotment of chamber in their favour shall be only from the quota of 7:10 chambers meant for the AOR quota..– Similarly, all those Member Advocates who had submitted their applications for allotment of chambers at an earlier occasion, either in the category of AOR or in the category of Advocate (Non-AOR) and have been subsequently designated as Senior Advocates, they shall be held to be eligible for allotment of chamber on that basis..Regarding the block period, the court, however, turned down the suggestion that the cut-off date should start from the year 2004. This, the court held, might defeat the object of the rules, since it might result in allotment of chambers to those who may be non-active as of today..However, the court modified the bock period as follows – October 01, 2013 to September 30, 2018..“Since, sometime has elapsed when the block period was fixed by the Judges’ Allotment Committee and we have extended the date for making application, the only modification which can be done is to put the block period from October 01, 2013 to September 30, 2018. It is during this period the applicant shall have to satisfy the criteria and appearances or filing as indicated above.”.This addressed concerns of many petitioners including Senior Advocate V Mohana who had assailed cut-off date of June 30, 2016 prescribed by the Allotment Rules..Read the judgment below.