Supreme Court Questions Efficacy of Senior Advocate Selection Process

The Supreme Court has called for a thorough reassessment of the current procedure for designating lawyers as senior advocates, expressing doubts about the effectiveness of brief interviews in evaluating a candidate's suitability. A bench comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and Augustine George Masih has referred the matter to Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna to determine whether a larger bench should examine the issue.

The bench highlighted concerns regarding the existing system, which allocates 25 out of 100 points to interviews or interactions, questioning whether a few minutes of interaction are sufficient to assess an advocate's personality and suitability for senior designation. This introspection stems from the guidelines established in the landmark judgments of *Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India* in 2017 and 2023, which outlined the framework for conferring senior designations.

Under Section 16 of the Advocates Act, the designation of senior advocates is intended as a privilege conferred by the Supreme Court or High Courts, contingent upon the advocate's consent. The bench observed that the statute does not envisage advocates applying for this honor, suggesting that if the legislature had intended such a process, it would have explicitly provided for applications in the Act.

The court also emphasized that integrity and fairness are paramount qualities for those seeking senior designation. An advocate lacking these attributes cannot be considered to have standing at the bar. The bench raised concerns about how the Permanent Committee, responsible for assessing candidates, should handle cases where there are pending complaints against an advocate in disciplinary committees of bar councils.