Supreme Court dismisses plea seeking 30% reservation for women lawyers in BCI, State Bar Councils

The Supreme Court on Friday rejected a plea by two women lawyers seeking 30 percent reservation for women advocates in the Bar Council of India (BCI) and State Bar Councils [Pooja Gupta v. Bar Council of India]..The plea filed by advocates Pooja Gupta and Julie George two practicing lawyers, hailing from Himachal Pradesh and Kerala respectively, sought quashing of the notification issued by the BCI on January 14 to hold elections to elect office bearers of BCI. "That the election notification dated 14.01.2022 issued by respondent No.1 for holding the elections of office bearers of Bar Council of India is illegal and violative of Article 14 and 19 (1) (g) and Article 21 of the Constitution of India as time and again the election is being held without making any provisions for adequate representation of the women in these elections," the plea said.A Bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao and Abhay S Oka refused to entertain the plea. "We are not inclined to entertain this writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India challenging the election notification dated 14.01.2022 issued by the respondent No.1 for holding the elections of office bearers to the Bar Council of India. The writ petition is dismissed," the order said.The plea besides seeking reservation for women, also took exception to the BCI holding elections in advance..The plea said that prior to the year 2010, elections of the office bearers of the Bar Council of India used to be held in the month of April since the tenure of the newly elected office bearers start from April 16. But from the year 2010 this practice was disrupted and the Bar Council of India started holding its election in advance. "In the year 2015 the elections were held in the month of December, though the tenure of the newly elected office bearers started w.e.f. April, 2016. Similarly, the election of office bearers were held in December, 2017 and the tenure of the office bearers started from April, 2018. Similar was the case in the December, 2019. Such practice was adopted without there being any specific rule in this regard," the plea said..The petitioner also highlighted how the BCI enhanced the tenure of the office bearers without following the appropriate procedure and without statutory authority."It appears that on 25th December, 2021 the meeting of respondent Bar Council of India was held at Delhi and even after strong protest by 2-3 Hon’ble Members, the majority of members of the Council have amended the rule and have resolved to hold the elections in hybrid/virtual mode. The Council also has enhanced the tenure of the office bearers even after the strong opposition by 3 Hon’ble Members including the Hon’ble Member from the State of Kerala and Karnataka," the petition stated.The plea therefore also prayed for directions to BCI to refrain from enhancing the tenure of State Bar Councils citing COVID pandemic.While dismissing the plea, the Court granted petitioners the liberty to approach the BCI and make a representation for redressal of their grievances..[Read Order]