6 May 2024 8:10 AM GMT
The Supreme Court today (May 06) clarified that its order whereby it had directed reservation of minimum one-third seats for women in the Supreme Court Bar Association's executive committee is on an "experimental basis" and that any difficulty faced in implementing the reforms would be placed before the Court.
The Bench of Justices Surya Kant and KV Viswanathan in its order passed on May 02 had made it clear that this reservation will also be applied in the coming elections, which are to be held on May 16, 2024. It was also ordered that the election committee, whose decision shall be final in all aspects, will comprise Senior Advocates Jaideep Gupta, Rana Mukherjee, and Meenakshi Arora. Apart from that, it was also directed that, in the upcoming election, the post of Treasurer of SCBA shall be reserved for a woman candidate.
Pursuant to this, the lawyer's body passed a resolution on the very next day calling for an 'Emergent General Meeting' on May 07. The resolution stated there was “no occasion” for the Supreme Court to pass this order. The purpose of the meeting, as given in the resolution was to discuss the nationwide consequences of Suo Moto amendment of Bar Association Rules and to decide further course of action. A detailed story on this can be read here.
Imperatively, the Apex Court, in its order today, also recorded that this aforesaid emergent meeting stands canceled now. Thus, the 'Emergent General Meeting', scheduled to be held tomorrow, will not be held now.
The order was passed after an oral mention was made by the office bearers of the lawyer's body. At the commencement, Senior advocate Pravin H. Parekh mentioned that the general body was being called to declare whether the order was valid or not.
In response to this, Justice Kant said that a consent order was passed. "There is a statement by you, as the president of the bar association, welcoming that order. You gave an example that like housing society, women representation can be there. We talk of women empowerment, We talk of Indian Constitution, we talk of reservation at grass root level...and bar association will say that no no we will not follow Indian Constitution and our Constitution is supreme...," Justice Kant said.
Thereafter, Senior advocate Jayant Bhushan clarified that the SCBA's concern was whether the Court could dictate its Constitution, not the reservation or the holding of the election. While the Court appreciated that the election process has commenced, it also highlighted that this is not the first time that the reforms were ordered by the Supreme Court. Justice Kant went on to say:
"Another aspect, you are the apex body. You are the first bar association of the country. The entire nation looks up to you. You have been persons who have been instrumental for decades in the enforcement of the fundamental rights of the people. In fact, you have been at the forefront of the adversities. Now, if you do not respect the constitutional provisions, who else will do?"
Subsequently, the bench also proposed that the association could bring the reforms.
"Why will we take this responsibility only when we find that the initiative is lacking, then only the question of judicial activism will come. If the bar association will come out with some proposals , why not we welcome your steps?... It is not that we are sitting silently. The way the format has been drafted, it is not desirable from the (SCBA)...so far as the general house is acting in conformity with the constitutional principles, well well-known reformatory principles, everybody will appreciate your step," said Justice Kant.
In this backdrop, the Court pronounced the following order:
"On the oral mentioning of the office bearers of the SCBA led by….it is clarified that the order dated May 02, 2024, is on an experimental basis. The difficulties, if any, experienced in giving effect to the reforms introduced through that order as a pilot project will be placed on record and shall be considered along with other reforms to be suggested by the SCBA as per the said order. Dr. Adish Aggarwala, President of the SCBA, clarifies that in deference to the order, the election process has commenced and is conducted as per the schedule fixed by this Court vide the order dated May 02. Dr. Adish Aggarwala, after consultation with other office bearers present in the court states that the meeting which was convened for tomorrow stands canceled...."
Moving forward, the Court also added in its order, that the SCBA Secretary shall hold the Annual General Meeting (AGM) on the date of election.
In its May 02nd order, the Court observed that SCBA is a “premier institution,” and its norms cannot remain static. The Court also underscored the need for timely reforms to confront the institution's challenges. Thus, the Court also passed directions to the SCBA to call for suggestions from the bar for reforming the SCBA rules regarding eligibility conditions for contestants, admission fee etc.
Case Title: Supreme Court Bar Association v. BD Kaushik, Diary No. 13992/2023