The Supreme Court today(October 1) requested the Attorney General, R. Venkataramani, to consider the plea of increasing the statutory limit of the State Bar Councils, which at present stands at 25 members as per Section 3(2)(b) of the Advocates Act, 1961.

A bench comprising Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana passed an order while hearing a writ petition filed by one advocate, who has contended that the statutory restriction of SBCs to 25 members was kept at a time when the 1961 Act was enacted. But over time, the electorate has grown substantially. For instance, he pointed out that the Bar Council of Delhi presently comprises 2 lakh registered advocates, which necessarily requires adequate and proportionate representation in the elected body.

The present writ petition, filed through AoR Nikhil Jain, has been preferred by one Rohit Pandey, who contested this year's Bar Council of Delhi Elections and secured 2,259 votes but fell short of 63.5 votes to be included among the 25 members of the SBC. However, because of the Supreme Court's direction reserving 30% representation for women advocates in the SBCs, a low-ranking woman candidate was declared elected even though she secured only 265 votes. As per his plea, the declaration of the said woman candidate as an elected member is contrary to the 1961 Act.

Supplementing this, Senior Advocate Vikas Singh and other senior advocates contended that Article 142 can't be used to pass a judicial order which is contrary to the statutory scheme. Considering the brief submissions, the Court deemed it fit to pass a similar order it had passed on September 2.

Justice Bagchi, while passing the order, said: "We are absolutely aware of the judicial limitation, and that's why requesting the Attorney General."

The Court orally stated that if the AG takes a contrary view, the Court will consider.

On September 2, the Court, while hearing another writ petition on enhancement of seats in Bar Councils of Maharashtra and Goa, stated that the issue involves taking a policy decision and therefore requested the AG to treat the writ petition as a representation and take appropriate decisions in consultation with the SBCs.

Subsequently, in another writ petition involving the need to increase seats in Bar Councils of Tamil Nadu to accommodate 30% representation for women, the bench further clarified that its September 2 order would apply pan-India.

In Yogamaya MG v UOI(2025), the Supreme Court passed a pathbreaking decision on December 8, 2025, allowing 30% reservation of seats in SBCs for women advocates.