New Delhi [India], May 12 : The Supreme Court on Friday issued fresh guidelines relating to the process for designation of senior advocates and upheld the interview criteria for it and recommended diversity, particularly with respect to gender and first-generation lawyers.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Aravind Kumar said they have upheld interview criteria as it would enable a more holistic assessment.
"We believe that an interview process would allow for a more personal and in-depth examination of the candidate. An interview also enables a more holistic assessment, particularly as the Senior Advocate designation is an honour conferred to exceptional advocates. A Senior Advocate is also required to be very articulate and precise within a given timeframe, which values that can be easily assessed during an interview," the top court said.
The court said that they have sought to make the interview process more workable and thus restricted the number of interviews to the appropriate amount as deemed feasible by the Permanent Committee.
"It is in this spirit that we have sought to make the interview process more workable. We have thus restricted the number of interviews to the appropriate amount as deemed feasible by the Permanent Committee, keeping in mind the number of Senior Advocates to be designated at a given time," the top court said.
"We also believe that due consideration should be given in the interest of diversity, particularly with respect to gender and first-generation lawyers. This would encourage meritorious advocates who will come into the field knowing that there is scope to rise to the top," the top court said.
The court further added that the profession has seen a paradigm shift over a period of time, particularly with the advent of newer law schools such as National Law Universities.
"The profession has seen a paradigm shift over a period of time, particularly with the advent of newer law schools such as National Law Universities. The legal profession is no longer considered as a family profession. Instead, there are newer entrants from all parts of the country and with different backgrounds. Such newcomers must be encouraged," the top court said.
The court also said that voting by secret ballot should not be a norm.
"This designation has always been held to be an honour conferred. While it is alleged that voting by secret ballot may not always subserve the interests of transparency, in practice, judges may be reluctant to put forth their views openly. This is especially the case where the comments of a judge can have a deleterious effect on the advocate's practice," the top court said.
"Thus, we find merit in the contention that voting by secret ballot should not be the rule but clearly an exception. In case it has to be resorted to, the reasons for the same should be recorded," the top court said.
The court was dealing with a petition by Senior Advocate Indira Jaisingh relating to the criteria for the designation of senior advocates in courts.
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor