SCAORA Submits Suggestions To Supreme Court On Guidelines For AORs, Reforms Of Senior Designation Process

The Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association (SCAORA) has filed suggestions before the Supreme Court regarding the code of conduct for the Advocates-on-Record and senior designation process.The Court took up these issues in a case arising out of false statements and the suppression of material facts made by a Senior Advocate in multiple remission pleas.As per the suggestions, the SCAORA has stated that the judgments of the Supreme Court in Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India (2017) & (2023)- which laid down objective parameters for senior designations- have, to a great extent, democratised and streamlined the process of senior designation. At the same time, the Association has suggested some tweaks in the process.After a false affidavit was filed by the Senior Advocate and the Advocate on Record, a bench of Justices Abhay S. Oka and AG Masih decided to lay down guidelines on the conduct of AORs. Subsequent to this Senior Advocate Dr. S. Muralidhar was appointed as the Amicus Curiae in the case and assistance was sought from the SCAORA's President, Vipin Nair. During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta sought a relook at the Senior Advocate designation process which is government by the 2017 judgment of the Supreme Court in Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India. While Muralidhar suggested a secret ballot system to select lawyers for conferring Senior Advocate designation.Last week, the bench reserved judgment.The following are suggestions from SCAORA:Suggestions for changes in the senior designation guidelines1. AOR should not be solely judged based on the number of appearances for designation as a senior advocate. Instead, real-time assessment of the AORs' contribution to the bench be considered. This can be done by inviting comments from judges on individual applications of the AORs. 2. The nature and quality of drafting can be an important criterion for assessment. This could be based on succinct pleadings, framing of questions of law of public importance, application of law and precedents while formulating grounds of appeal, etc.3. The Permanent Committee formed for the designation of senior advocates should have the nominated seniormost office bearers of SCAOR and Supreme Court Bar Association as ex-officio members. 4. Additional marks should be given to the AOR/Advocates who take up lectures and training modules for advocates.5. AORs are not informed of marks assigned to them before the interview stage. It is suggested that marks assigned in the initial evaluation ought to be communicated. The existing marks allocated for personal interaction, that is, 25 marks, should be reduced. Suggestions on guidelines for AORs' conduct1. The need for the hour is the implementation of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, which already have provisions to regulate the conduct of AORs. There should be robust training for AORs when they clear the examination and thereafter, regular training every 2 years from the date of registration. After that, a certificate of practice ought to be issued by the Supreme Court which acts as checks and balances with regard to procedures, rules and regulations. 2. There should be adequate representation of the SCAORA in the Board of Examiners that conducts the AOR exam. This would enable the Board to be informed of the correct perspectives that exist for the AORs. 3. SCAORA would be more than willing, if the competent authority provides the necessary infrastructural support to enable it to organise regular workshops and symposiums, to impart various training modules which could cover professional ethics, practice and procedure, and legal advancement. This mandatory training program will serve a multi-fold purpose, as it will not only act as a refresher course for the AORs but also keep them abreast with the changes in the practice and procedure through several Registry notifications, enabling them to address the issues raised by the Court.4. Organise regular and periodic “Open Houses” where there is an active and purposive interaction between the AORs and the concerned Registry officials for clarifying doubts and clearing bottlenecks that are endemic to the filing, registration, and verification of matters for early listings before the Court.It is stated: "These Open Houses would necessarily require the infrastructural support of the competent authority and should be made a permanent feature throughout the year. The need for such measures emanates from the fact that the Registry keeps on shifting the goalpost so to speak, since there have been repeated changes/variations made, unilaterally, by the Registry with respect to the criteria for checking, verifying, etc. of pleadings filed before the Supreme Court. There is no system or handbook available of instructions regarding the process of checking and verifying pleadings at the moment. The norms and criteria are being changed at the whims and fancies of the Section officials without any prior intimation to the AOR...

SCAORA Submits Suggestions To Supreme Court On Guidelines For AORs, Reforms Of Senior Designation Process

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

Tags