# [2018] 13 S.C.R. 517

- **Citation:** [2018] 13 S.C.R. 517
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 2018-10-25
- **Bench:** A. K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/2018-13-s-c-r-517-32517
- **Pages:** 30

## Headnote

Supreme Court Lawyers' Chambers (Allotment and
Occupancy) Rules - Supreme Court invited applications for
allotment of Lawyers' chambers on 31st October. 2017 and 16th May,
2018 stipulating various eligibility criteria for allotment of chambers
- Challenged by petitioners, practicing advocates, some of whom
are Advocates on Record (AOR), while others fall under the category
of 'other advocates'/'non-advocate on record' - Challenge inter
alia to fixation of block period (period for which eligibility criteria
of filing and/or appearance has to be fulfilled) - Held: There is
rationale in the decision taken by the Judges' Allotment Committee
(on whose recommendations, chambers are allotted by the Hon'ble
CJI to the advocates) for fixing the block period from 1st June 2011
to 30th June 2016 as contained in the revised notice dated 16th May
2018 viz. fixing the block period which is proximate to the notice
for making application for the allotment - Therefore, starting of
cut-off date from the year 2004 is unacceptable - However, since,
sometime has elapsed when the block period was fixed by the Judges'
Allotment Committee and the date for making application has been
extended, the only modification which can be done, is to put the
block period from 1st October, 2013 to 30th September, 2018 - It is
during this period the applicant shall have to satisfy the criteria for
appearances or filing - Further, plea of petitioners that membership
of Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association (SCAORA)
should be treated as sufficient eligibility for allotment of chambers,
rejected - No reason to interfere with the requirement of being a
member of Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) for
submitting application for allotment of chambers - Constitution of
India - Art. 14.
[2018] 13 S.C.R. 517
517
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
518
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 13 S.C.R.
Disposing of the writ petitions, the Court
HELD: 1.1 Change of Block Period: A suggestion was
made that period of 730 days for fulfillment of the eligibility criteria
shall be counted from the last cut-off date in 2004 till September
30, 2018. This suggestion cannot be accepted as it is way too off
the mark and may have no connection with the active practice
requirement of an advocate, having proximity with the date when
the applications for allotment are invited. It hardly needs to be
emphasised that pre-requisite for allotment of chamber is that
the concerned advocate should be in active practice. That is why
the eligibility criteria for member advocates is the requirement
of 50 appearances per year in the block year; for AORs, it is
minimum of 20 filings or 50 appearances in a period of one year
for two years and minimum 40 filings or 100 appearances in a
period of 730 days. However, if the cut-off date starts from the
year 2004, this purpose may be lost in many cases, resulting in
alloting the chambers to those who may be non-active as of today.
There may be cases where a non-AOR or AOR may fulfil
conditions of appearances/filing in first 730 days starting from
the year 2004 i.e. during the year 2004-2005 and thereafter he
may not have any appearances or filings, or such appearances/
filings may be negligible. Still he/she would become entitled to
allotment of chamber. This would bring in such advocates who
may not be in active practice in recent past. Such a situation cannot
be countenanced. There is rationale in the decision taken by the
Judges' Allotment Committee for fixing the block period from
June 01, 2011 to June 30, 2016 as contained in the revised notice
dated May 16, 2018 viz. fixing the block period which is proximate
to the notice for making application for the allotment. Therefore,
starting of cut-off date from the year 2004 is unacceptable. Since,
sometime has elapsed when the block period was fixed by the
Judges' Allotment Committee and the date for making application
is extended, the only modification which can be done is to put the
block period from October 01, 2

## Text

_Characters 0–39,732 of 63,526. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39732 for what follows._

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
517
GOPAL JHA
v.
THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 745 of 2018)
OCTOBER 25, 2018
[A. K. SIKRI AND ASHOK BHUSHAN, JJ.]
Supreme Court Lawyers' Chambers (Allotment and
Occupancy) Rules - Supreme Court invited applications for
allotment of Lawyers' chambers on 31st October. 2017 and 16th May,
2018 stipulating various eligibility criteria for allotment of chambers
- Challenged by petitioners, practicing advocates, some of whom
are Advocates on Record (AOR), while others fall under the category
of 'other advocates'/'non-advocate on record' - Challenge inter
alia to fixation of block period (period for which eligibility criteria
of filing and/or appearance has to be fulfilled) - Held: There is
rationale in the decision taken by the Judges' Allotment Committee
(on whose recommendations, chambers are allotted by the Hon'ble
CJI to the advocates) for fixing the block period from 1st June 2011
to 30th June 2016 as contained in the revised notice dated 16th May
2018 viz. fixing the block period which is proximate to the notice
for making application for the allotment - Therefore, starting of
cut-off date from the year 2004 is unacceptable - However, since,
sometime has elapsed when the block period was fixed by the Judges'
Allotment Committee and the date for making application has been
extended, the only modification which can be done, is to put the
block period from 1st October, 2013 to 30th September, 2018 - It is
during this period the applicant shall have to satisfy the criteria for
appearances or filing - Further, plea of petitioners that membership
of Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association (SCAORA)
should be treated as sufficient eligibility for allotment of chambers,
rejected - No reason to interfere with the requirement of being a
member of Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) for
submitting application for allotment of chambers - Constitution of
India - Art. 14.
[2018] 13 S.C.R. 517
517
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
518
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 13 S.C.R.
Disposing of the writ petitions, the Court
HELD: 1.1 Change of Block Period: A suggestion was
made that period of 730 days for fulfillment of the eligibility criteria
shall be counted from the last cut-off date in 2004 till September
30, 2018. This suggestion cannot be accepted as it is way too off
the mark and may have no connection with the active practice
requirement of an advocate, having proximity with the date when
the applications for allotment are invited. It hardly needs to be
emphasised that pre-requisite for allotment of chamber is that
the concerned advocate should be in active practice. That is why
the eligibility criteria for member advocates is the requirement
of 50 appearances per year in the block year; for AORs, it is
minimum of 20 filings or 50 appearances in a period of one year
for two years and minimum 40 filings or 100 appearances in a
period of 730 days. However, if the cut-off date starts from the
year 2004, this purpose may be lost in many cases, resulting in
alloting the chambers to those who may be non-active as of today.
There may be cases where a non-AOR or AOR may fulfil
conditions of appearances/filing in first 730 days starting from
the year 2004 i.e. during the year 2004-2005 and thereafter he
may not have any appearances or filings, or such appearances/
filings may be negligible. Still he/she would become entitled to
allotment of chamber. This would bring in such advocates who
may not be in active practice in recent past. Such a situation cannot
be countenanced. There is rationale in the decision taken by the
Judges' Allotment Committee for fixing the block period from
June 01, 2011 to June 30, 2016 as contained in the revised notice
dated May 16, 2018 viz. fixing the block period which is proximate
to the notice for making application for the allotment. Therefore,
starting of cut-off date from the year 2004 is unacceptable. Since,
sometime has elapsed when the block period was fixed by the
Judges' Allotment Committee and the date for making application
is extended, the only modification which can be done is to put the
block period from October 01, 2013 to September 30, 2018.
It is during this period the applicant shall have to satisfy the
criteria and appearances or filing as indicated above. [Paras 24,
25] [537-A-H]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
519
1.2 Applications for allotment of chambers were last invited
in the year 2004 and considerable period has lapsed thereafter.
Therefore, in order to ensure that such situation does not occur
in future, Notice inviting such applications should be at least once
in three years. [Para 26] [538-B-C]
2. Validity of Rule 3 of the Allotment Rules: In order to
become a member of SCAORA, as per Rule 4 of the Rules and
Regulations of Supreme Court Advocate on Record Association
(SCAORA) itself, an advocate has to be the member of Supreme
Court Bar Association (SCBA). Therefore, unless an advocate
is an AOR and also a member of SCBA, he cannot become the
member of SCAORA. This requirement itself accepts the position
that SCBA is an umbrella organisation and also recognises the
vital role it plays. Thus, the argument based on Article 14 of the
Constitution would be of no avail. There is no fundamental right
or any statutory right for allotment of chambers in any court
premises. There is no reason to interfere with the requirement
of being a member of SCBA for submitting application for
allotment of chambers. [Paras 35-37] [543-C-D; 544-F-G]
3. Prescription of the requirement of resident in Delhi or
New Delhi in Rule 3 of the Allotment Rules: Having regard to
the changed circumstances and the manner in which areas around
Delhi have developed in past few years, many advocates who
appear in courts in Delhi, including the Supreme Court, commute
on daily basis from their residences which fall in neighbouring
States. It is time to reconsider as to whether requirement of
residence in Delhi or New Delhi in Rule 3 of the Allotment Rules
needs to be retained or it should be extended to some areas of
neighbouring States which are quite close to the vicinity of the
Supreme Court. May be, by fixing a particular radial distance
from the Supreme Court, the problem can be tackled. As it would
require consideration on so many aspects, this issue can be
considered by the Judges' Allotment Committee. It is for the
Committee to take a final view on this issue, after taking into
consideration all the relevant factors. [Paras 39, 40] [545-B,
F-H; 546-A]
GOPAL JHA v. THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
520
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 13 S.C.R.
Shayara Bano v. Union of India (2017) 9 SCC 1:
[2017] 7 SCR 797 ; Supreme Court Bar Association &
Ors. v. B.D. Kaushik (2011) 13 SCC 774 : [2011] 15
SCR 736 ; Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal v. Union of India &
Anr. (2003) 2 SCC 45 : [2002] 5 Suppl. SCR 186 ;
Vinay Balachandra Joshi v. Registrar General,
Supreme Court of India & Ors. (1998) 7 SCC 461
- referred to.
Case Law Reference
[2017] 7 SCR 797
 referred to Para 27
[2011] 15 SCR 736
 referred to Para 28
[2002] 5 Suppl. SCR 186 referred to
Para 28
(1998) 7 SCC 461
referred to
Para 34
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition (Civil)
No. 745 of 2018
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
WITH
Writ Petition (Civil) Nos. 772, 844, 917, 854, 975, 947, 941, 998,
997, 1063, 1058 and 959 of 2018.
 Maninder Singh, ASG, K. V. Vishwanathan, S. R. Singh,
R. C. Mishra, Vikas Singh, Jayant K. Sud, Sr. Advs., Gopal
Sankaranarayanan, Ms. Pooja Dhar, Surya Prakash, Ms. Aishwarya
Kane, Ms. Gaytri Verma, Javed Mahmud Rao, Dilip Raghuvanshi,
Ms. Isha Singh, Gautam Singh, Kumar Ranjan, Adarsh Verma, Varun
K. Chopra, Kaushik Poddar, Ashok Kumar, Praveen Swarup, Ananya
Mishra, Sudhanshu S. Choudhari, Pramod Dayal, Nikunj Dayal,
Ms. Payal Dayal, B. Raghunath, R. Venkataraman, Sriram P.,
A. Lakshminarayanan, Abhimanue Shrestha, Ms. K. R. Chitra, Anirudh
Sanganeria, Vikram Gulati, Annam D. N. Rao, Vikrant Yadav, Manish
Goswami, Rajiv Kumar, Ms. Ashita Chawla, Parangal Pandey, Advs.
for the appearing parties.
Gopal Jha, Petitioner-in-person.
M. R. Shamshad, Petitioner-in-person
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
521
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
 A. K. SIKRI, J. 1. The petitioners in these writ petitions are the
practicing advocates who also claim that they are regularly practicing
and appearing in the Supreme Court. Some of them are advocates on
record (AOR), while others do not fall under this category. They are
not designated senior advocates either and, therefore, can be put in the
category of 'other advocates'/'non-advocate on record'. All these
petitioners are desirous of getting a chamber in the Lawyers Chamber
Block in the Supreme Court.
2. This Court, on administrative side, has framed Supreme Court
Lawyers' Chambers (Allotment and Occupancy) Rules (hereinafter
referred to as the 'Chamber Allotment Rules') which govern the
procedure for allotment of chambers within the compound of Supreme
Court. These rules lay down the eligibility criteria for allotment of
chambers. In accordance with these rules, the Hon'ble Chief Justice of
India (CJI) has also constituted the Judges' Allotment Committee. It
comprises of Hon'ble Judges of this Court, nominated by CJI. There is
another Committee as well, which is headed by the Attorney General
for India and office bearer of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA)
as well as Supreme Court Advocate on Record Association (SCAORA).
On the basis of recommendations of the Allotment Committee(s), the
CJI ordinarily allots chambers to the advocates.
3. In the year 1995, a recommendation was made by the Allotment
Committee for allotment of chambers to AOR, non-advocates on record
(other advocates) and senior advocates in the ratio of 7:2:1. This
recommendation was accepted by the CJI on August 29, 1995. Since
then, allotment is made in the aforesaid ratio to the aforesaid three
categories of advocates.
4. Relevant Chamber Allotment Rules, with which we are
concerned in these petitions, may be reproduced below:
"2. Allotment of Chambers shall be made by a Committee
appointed by the Chief Justice of India and all such allotments
shall be subject to the approval of the Chief Justice of India.
3. Allotment shall be made to such advocates of the Supreme
Court as are members of the Supreme Court Bar Association
who regularly practice in the Supreme Court and who reside in
Delhi or New Delhi.
GOPAL JHA v. THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
522
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 13 S.C.R.
4. Allotment of chambers to applicants, who are members of the
Supreme Court Bar Association, shall be made in the following
order:
(i) Advocates-on-Record who are regularly practising in this
Court;
(ii) Non Advocates-on-Record resident in Delhi/New Delhi and
who are mainly and regularly practising in this Court; and
(iii) Senior Advocates resident in Delhi/New Delhi and who are
mainly and regularly practising in this Court.
 Provided, however, that allotment shall be made in accordance
with the roster maintained in the following order:
 The first four vacancies be allotted to Advocates-on-Record,
the fifth vacancy to the Non Advocates-on-record, sixth, seventh
and eighth vacancies to Advocates-on-Record, ninth vacancy to
the Non Advocates-on-Record and tenth vacancy to Senior
Advocates and the cycle shall be repeated in the above order.
xx
xx
xx
18. The Chief Justice may in his discretion cancel any allotment
where an allottee infringes any condition of allotment or violates
any rule governing the allotment or for any other reason.
xx
xx
xx
20. The allotment shall terminate:
(a) On its cancellation by the Chief Justice of India; or
(b) On its surrender by the allottee concerned; or
(c) On the allottee failing to pay the licence fee and other charges
for the two successive months; or
(d) On the allottee ceasing to be a member of the Supreme Court
Bar Association; or
(e) On the allottes' name being removed from the Roll of a State
Bar Council; or
(f) On an allottee of a chamber not complying with the orders of
the Allotment Committee, as approved by the Hon'ble Chief Justice
of India; or
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
523
(g) On the death of an allottee; or
(h) On the allottee being elevated to the Bench of the High
Court/Supreme Court.
 Provided, however, that the allottees' name shall be put first
in the respective category of the waiting list, if such member on
his/her retirement joins back the practice and is made active
member of Supreme Court Bar Association on his/her application
for allotment.
 xx
 xx
xx
23. The Chief Justice of India may from time to time make such
amendments and additions to these Rules as may be necessary
and expedient.
24. If any question arises as to the interpretation of these Rules,
the decision of the Chief Justice of India shall be final."
5. It may be mentioned that the allotment to these chambers is
made on the availability thereof and, at that time, applications for allotment
of chambers are invited. This exercise was conducted last time in the
year 2004. Thereafter, i.e. after a gap of thirteen years, the Supreme
Court invited applications for allotment of Lawyers' chambers on October
31, 2017 and May 16, 2018 vide Notice inviting applications where
eligibility criteria was also stipulated. In the notice dated October 31,
2017, following eligibility criteria was mentioned:
"Online Applications are hereby invited from Senior Advocates,
Advocates-on-Record who are members of the Supreme Court
Bar Association and fulfill the following eligibility criteria for
updating the existing Panels for allotment of Lawyers Chambers:
1. SENIOR ADVOCATES
(a) Who are mainly and regularly practising in the Supreme Court.
(b) Who must have minimum of 50 appearances (Admission and
regular hearing matters excluding I.A.s/Cr.M.P.s) each year for
any two consecutive years between 01.06.2011 and 30.06.2016.
(Registrar's Court Appearance shall not be taken into
consideration).
GOPAL JHA v. THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
[A. K. SIKRI, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
524
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 13 S.C.R.
(c) Subject to the above two requirements being complied with,
the allotment shall be made based on priority of the date of their
being designated as Senior Advocate.
2. ADVOCATES-ON-RECORD
(a) Who must have filed (or entered appearances on behalf of
respondents) on an average 20 cases per annum (i.e. admission/
regular matters and not I.A.s/Cr.M.Ps and Government Filing) in
the course of any two consecutive years between 01.06.2011 and
30.06.2016 (a batch of cases shall be treated as a single case).
(b) Subject to the above requirements being complied with, the
allotment shall be made according to the date of seniority i.e. the
date of registration as AOR.
3. JUNIOR ADVOCATE (NON ADVOCATE-ON-RECORD)
(a) Who are mainly and regularly practising in the Supreme Court.
(b) Who must have put in not less than fifty appearances
(Admission and regular hearing matters excluding I.As. and
Cr.M.Ps.) each year for any two consecutive years between
01.06.2011 and 30.06.2016.
(c) Subject to the above two requirements being complied with,
the seniority of such persons shall be based on the date of their
present admission to the active membership of the Supreme Court
Bar Association."
6. As is clear from the above, one of the eligibility conditions for
AOR was filing of twenty cases per annum in the course of any two
consecutive years between June 01, 2011 to June 30, 2016 and for other
advocates, 50 appearances each year for any two consecutive years
between June 01, 2011 to June 30, 2016. Further, as far as seniority is
concerned, in respect of AOR, it was to be from the date of registration
as AOR. For other advocates, seniority is to be based on the date of
their admission to the active membership of SCBA. For senior advocates,
allotment is to be made on priority on th date of their being designated as
senior advocates.
7. Some advocates including the petitioners herein felt aggrieved
by one or the other eligibility conditions, depending upon the category in
which they fall. They sent representations to SCBA as well as Secretary
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
525
General, Supreme Court of India, requesting for change of criteria for
eligibility of allotment of chambers. Specific grievance was with respect
to the fixation of block period between June 01, 2011 to June 30, 2016
for which the requirement of filing and/or appearance has to be fulfilled.
As per the petitioners, the matter was dealt with by the Chamber
Allotment Committee headed by the Attorney General and some
amendments were carried out. On that basis, SCBA issued circular for
its members on March 15, 2018 mentioning the changes, accepted by
the Chamber Allotment Committee. This circular reads as under:
"The Letter dated 09.01.2018 was discussed at length in today's
Chambers Allotment Committee Meeting and the recommendations
made therein have been accepted by the Committee to the extent
detailed below:
(i) Calendar Year now will be January to December instead of
June to May.
(ii) The period of eligibility for filing/appearances shall be from
01.01.2004 to 31st December 2017 (Two consecutive years).
(iii) Self Attested proceedings print out from the website i.e.
www.sci.gov.in shall be sufficient compliance for consideration
for Chambers Allotment, instead of certified copy.
(iv) Self Attested proceedings shall be filed along with prescribed
notarized format (Registry shall inform the format in due course).
(v) Complete set of application in physical form be submitted in
the Registry besides online applications which may be submitted
by the applicants, if they so opt.
(vi) Filing of Government cases is also included as eligibility criteria
for Central Government as well as State Government Standing
Counsels.
(vii) Interlocutory Application (I.A.) or Criminal Misc. Petitions
(Crl.M.P.) are also included towards appearance as well as filing,
as the case may be.
(viii) Further, in case of Company of two or more AORs, all AOR
partners will separately be entitled for allotment of Chambers with
separate set of cases (with the consent of other partners that
they shall not use the same set of cases for their individual
allotment).
GOPAL JHA v. THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
[A. K. SIKRI, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
526
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 13 S.C.R.
(ix) Members who were Voters of SCBA from 2012 till the last
election i.e. December, 2017, based on B.D. Kaushik's Judgments
passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, shall also be entitled
to apply for Chambers Allotment (in any year within the above
mentioned period).
(x) Fresh Vakalatnama after obtaining NOC from the previous/
earlier AOR shall also be counted separately for the subsequent
AOR.
(xi) Filing of Caveat is not to be counted.
(xii) The use of word "Junior Advocate" for Non AOR shall not
be used in any proceeding/notification. Categories may be referred
to as "Senior Advocate", "Advocate on Record" and "Advocate".
(xiii) Further time has been extended for submission of applications
for Chambers Allotment till 30th April 2018. (Notification shall be
issued in due course).
(xiv) Appearance before Mediation Committee shall not be
counted."
8. However, the opinion of the Judges' Allotment Committee was
at variance with some of the aforesaid suggestion. It was considered at
the appropriate level and a decision was taken.
9. Thereafter, revised notice dated May 16, 2018 was issued by
the Administration General Branch of the Supreme Court for inviting
applications for allotment of Lawyers Chambers and the eligibility criteria
for three category of advocates was stated in the following terms:
"1. SENIOR ADVOCATES
(a) Who are mainly and regularly practising in the Supreme Court.
(b) Who must have minimum of 50 appearances (Admission and
regular hearing matters excluding I.A.s/Cr.M.P.s save and except
interim applications in Public Interest Litigations which are
*substantive applications and decided by the Court and such
petitions like Special Leave Petitions filed with applications for
condonation of delay and listed in Court with Diary Number and
disposed of with diary number by the Court) each year either for
any two consecutive years between 01.06.2011 and 30.06.2016
or for any two non-consecutive years between 01.06.2011 and
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
527
30.06.2016 provided the Advocate/Applicant concerned availing
the option of appearances during two non-consecutive years has
been on the Voters' list of Supreme Court Bar Association for the
entire block period. (Registrar's Court Appearance shall not be
taken into consideration).
(c) Subject to the above two requirements being complied with,
the allotment shall be made based on priority of the date of their
being designated as Senior Advocate.
2. ADVOCATES-ON-RECORD
(a) Who must have filed (or entered appearances on behalf of
respondents) on an average 20 cases per annum (i.e. admission/
regular matters and not I.A.s/Cr.M.Ps and Government Filing save
and except interim applications in Public Interest Litigations which
are *substantive applications and decided by the Court and such
petitions like Special Leave Petitions filed with applications for
condonation of delay and listed in Court with Diary Number and
disposed of with diary number by the Court) each year for any
two consecutive years between 01.06.2011 and 30.06.2016 or for
any two non-consecutive years between 01.06.2011 and
30.06.2016 provided the Advocate/Applicant concerned availing
the option of filing during two non-consecutive years has been on
the Voters' list of Supreme Court Bar Association for the entire
block period (a batch of cases shall be treated as a single case).
(b) Subject to the above requirements being complied with, the
allotment shall be made according to the date of seniority i.e. the
date of registration as AOR.
3. NON-ADVOCATE-ON-RECORD
(a) Who are mainly and regularly practising in the Supreme Court.
(b) Who must have put in not less than fifty appearances
(Admission and regular hearing matters excluding I.As. and
Cr.M.Ps. save and except interim applications in Public Interest
Litigations which are *substantive applications and decided by
the Court and such petitions like Special Leave Petitions filed
with applications for condonation of delay and listed in Court with
Diary Number and disposed of with diary number by the Court)
each year either for any two consecutive years between 01.06.2011
GOPAL JHA v. THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
[A. K. SIKRI, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
528
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 13 S.C.R.
and 30.06.2016 or for any two non-consecutive years between
01.06.2011 and 30.06.2016 provided the Advocate/Applicant
concerned availing the option of appearances during two nonconsecutive years has been on the Voters' list of Supreme Court
Bar Association for the entire block period.
(c) Subject to the above two requirements being complied with,
the seniority of such persons shall be based on the date of their
present admission to the active membership of the Supreme Court
Bar Association.
*(For illustration, substantive applications may be referred to such
interim applications by the project proponent or the applicant itself
as are filed in Public Interest Litigation entitled 'T.N. Godavarman
Thirumalpad v. Union of India & Ors.' and decided by the Court
as Such)"
10. As demand of the advocates, particularly with respect to block
period was not met, the SCBA took up the matter again by addressing
communication dated July 18, 2018 to CJI wherein it was stated that
following provisions pertaining to allotment of chambers were not
incorporated in the notice dated May 16, 2018 which was issued for
inviting applications for allotment of chambers:
"1. Eligibility of Advocates who had requisite number of filing/
appearances from Calendar year January - December 2004 to
December 2017 instead of May 2011 to June 2016.
2. Requisite Calendar year shall be 1st January to 31st December
instead of filing/appearance year 1st July to 30th June.
3. Number of filing by Advocates-on-Record of Government/State
Cases shall be counted for the purpose of eligibility criteria.
4. Non-Advocates-On-Record satisfying the appearances criteria,
becoming Advocates-On-Record in 2016 onwards not satisfying
the filing criteria in less than 2 years, be included in the panel of
Advocates-On-Record in order of their seniority as AdvocateOn-Record.
5. Similarly, AORs and Non-AORs subsequently designated as
Senior Advocates from 2016 onwards, satisfying the eligibility
norms as Advocates-On-Record/Non Advocates-On-Record be
included in the panel of Senior Advocates in chronology of being
designated as Senior Advocate."
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
529
 11. Some of the petitioners herein also made representations to
the Supreme Court raising their specific grievances qua the aforesaid
notice dated May 16, 2018. As per them, since their grievance have not
been redressed, these petitions have been filed.
12. At this stage, we may mention in tabular form, the grievances,
which are made by each of the petitioners in these writ petitions:
Sl. No.
Cause Title
Relief Sought
1
Gopal Jha, WP(C) No.
745/2018
Change
of
block
period
from
01.06.2011-30.06.2016 to 01.01.2005
to 17.10.2017/ 16.05.2018.
2
Anirudh
Sanganeria,
WP(C) No. 772/2018
Calendar year to be taken as JanuaryDecember instead of June to June and
the cut-off period of eligibility for
filing appearances to be modified to
31.12.2017 instead of 30.06.2016.
3
Kumar Ranjan, WP(C)
No. 854/2018
Change
of
block
period
from
01.06.2011-30.06.2016 to 01.01.2005
to 31.12.2017.
4
V.
Shyam
Mohan,
WP(C) No. 844/2018
Challenged Clause 3 of the Lawyers
Chambers (Allotment and Occupancy)
Rules as it violates of Article 14,
19(1)(c) and Article 19(1)(g) as it
mandates that applicant should be a
member of SCBA.
5
Sahdev Singh, WP(C)
No. 941 of 2018
Take into consideration period from
01.01.2004 - 31.05.2011 in the Block
Period.
6
Shirin Khajuria, WP(C)
No. 917/2018
(i) AOR should be permitted to apply
in the category of Non-AOR.
(ii) Third category to be renamed as
Advocate.
7
V. Mohana, WP(C) No.
997/2018
Extend cut-off date from 31.06.2016
and in the alternative quash notice
dated 16.05.2018, on the ground that
Clause 3B is violative of Article 14 and
19.
8
R.K. Singh, WP(C) No.
975/2018
Block date to be taken as 01.01.2004 -
31.12.2017
GOPAL JHA v. THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
[A. K. SIKRI, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
530
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 13 S.C.R.
 ___________________________ _______________________
13. From the aforesaid, it can be seen that following issues have
been raised in these writ petitions:
(i) Change of Block Period: Notice dated May 16, 2018 mentions
the block period from June 01, 2011 to June 30, 2016. Different petitioners
have suggested different block periods which are: (a) block period should
be January 01, 2005 to October 17, 2017/May 16, 2018; (b) January 01,
2005 to December 31, 2017; (c) Period from January 01, 2004 to May
31, 2011 should also be taken into consideration; and (d) January 01,
2004 to December 31, 2017.
(ii) Calendar year mentioned in notice dated May 16, 2018 is from
June to June. The suggestion is that it should be taken as January to
December.
(iii) Clause 3 of the Allotment Rules as per which allotment can
be made to those advocates only who are members of SCBA is
challenged inter alia by contending that apart from SCBA, there is an
9
Jaikriti
S. Jadeja &
Ors.,
WP(C) No. 947/2018
Cut-off period be extended till
31.12.2017.
10
M.R. Shamshad, WP(C) No.
998/2018
Quashing of Condition 2(a) of
revised
notice
inviting
applications for allotment of
Lawyers
Chambers
dated
16.05.2018.
11
Vikram Gulati, WP(C) No.
1063/2018
(i) Change of block period
from 01.06.2011-30.06.2016 to
01.01.2004 to 31.12.2017.
(ii)
To
not
insist on the
condition of his name being on
voters list of SCBA and to
include NCR to the place of
residence.
(iii) Calendar year to be from
January to December instead of
June to May and the cut-off
period
be
extended
till
31.12.2017.
12
Divyesh Pratap Singh, WP(C)
No. 1058/2018
Cut-off period be extended till
30.08.2018.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
531
association of AOR as well, known as SCAORA and it should be
sufficient when a person is a member of SCAORA.
(iv) Requirement of minimum filings of AOR and appearances by
senior advocates and other advocates is also questioned.
 Main contention in this behalf is that, in the year 2004,
when the applications were invited, the requirement was different and it
should not be changed.
(v) An incidental issue is also raised as to whether Supreme Court
should invite the applications for allotment of chambers by issuing specific
notices from time to time or it should be a continuous process.
14. Notices in these petitions were issued. Registrar, Supreme
Court of India has filed reply affidavits in some of these writ petitions
which cover all the issues raised. It is, inter alia, stated that Chamber
Allotment Committee consisting of the learned Attorney General for
India, as a Chairman and the Presidents, Vice-Presidents and Hony.
Secretaries of SCBA and SCAORA as Members, in its meeting held on
November 18, 2015, approved the draft notification inviting applications
for empanelment of lawyers for allotment of chambers vide Agenda
Item No. 10. Vide this resolution, it was, inter alia, agreed that the
block period should be from January 01, 2009 to December 31, 2014.
Soon after the aforesaid recommendations, a number of letters/
representations from the advocates were received by the Registry praying
for change in the block period. The Chamber Allotment Committee
headed by the learned Attorney General for India again convened a
meeting on May 11, 2016 and after consideration, the requests of the
advocates vide Agenda Item No. 2, inter alia, resolved in connection
with the block period as under:
"The Committee perused the aforesaid letters vis-a-vis the Office
Report and resolved that since the year 2015 has already gone by,
the earlier approved Block Period (01.01.2009 to 31.12.2014) may
now be changed to new Block Period (01.01.2010 to 31.12.2015)
so that more and more eligible Advocates may apply."
15. The aforementioned recommendations were placed for
approval and orders before the Hon'ble Judges Committee for approving
allotment of Lawyers Chambers and thereafter, were also placed before
the CJI. The comments made by the Registry in this regard were also
GOPAL JHA v. THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
[A. K. SIKRI, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
532
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 13 S.C.R.
placed before the Hon'ble Judges Committee on July 11, 2016.
Considering the comments made by the Registry that chambers in Pragati
Maidan will be available sometime in the end of 2017 and if block period
is confined to the year 2015 as resolved by the Chamber Allotment
committee headed by the learned Attorney General for India, advocates
who may complete minimum number of appearances after 2015 may
not apply for allotment and, therefore, it was submitted for consideration,
if the block period should be upto December 31, 2015 or June 30, 2016
or some other dates.
16. The Hon'ble Judges Committee, inter alia, recommended
that the block period may be changed so as to make it from June 01,
2011 to June 30, 2016. The same was also approved by the then CJI
vide order dated July 28, 2016. Accordingly, notification dated October
31, 2017 inviting online application for empanelment of Lawyers for
allotment of chambers was issued.
17. Since, representations were received against this notification
also from certain advocates and even SCBA. These representations
were placed before Chamber Allotment Committee headed by the learned
Attorney General for India in its meeting dated March 15, 2018 wherein
recommendation was made, as already noted above. It was placed
before the Judges Committee on March 27, 2018. The Judges Committee,
however, did not accept the same in its entirety. The earlier block period
already notified i.e. June 01, 2011 to June 30, 2016 was recommended to
be retained as unaltered while some of the recommendations were
accepted. However, before the aforesaid recommendation of the Judges
Committee could be considered by the CJI, the SCBA again reiterated
its request. Because of this reason, Judges Committee again assembled
on May 9, 2018 wherein hearing was given to the President and Hony.
Secretary of SCBA. The Judges Committee, however, did not agree to
change the block period, but recommended the following changes:
"In addition to the requirement of having minimum number of
filings and or appearances in two consecutive years in the block
period of five preceding years, an applicant who otherwise fulfills
the criteria of requisite number of filings and or appearances even
in two non-consecutive years in the block period of preceding
five years shall also be eligible provided he was on the voters' list
of Supreme Court Bar Association for the entire block period of
five years."
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
533
"...that such petitions which are disposed of with diary number by
the Court may also be reckoned for computing the requisite number
of filings and or appearances."
"...that interim applications in Public Interest Litigations which
are substantive applications and decided by the Court as such
shall also be counted towards the requisite number of filings and
or appearances."
18. This led to the issuance of the revised notice dated May 16,
2018. SCBA made another representation dated July 18, 2018.
In the meantime, certain writ petitions were also filed in which
notice was issued. Accordingly, Judges Committee resolved in its
meeting held on July 30, 2018 as under:
"The Committee understands that the issue regarding allotment
of chambers is pending consideration before the Bench presided
over by Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri. Following order was
passed by the Bench today:-
'Issue notice, returnable in two weeks.
Dasti, in addition, is also permitted.
The respondents shall endeavour to file their reply before the next
day of hearing.
We are informed that 31.07.2018 is the last date for making
application for allotment of chambers. The petitioners herein may
make their applications which may be received/accepted
provisionally and kept separately.'
In the circumstances, the Committee feels it would be inappropriate
to deal with the matter till the pending matter is disposed of on the
judicial side."
19. On one hearing, when the matters came up before the Court,
Mr. Maninder Singh, learned ASG, appearing for the Supreme Court,
made a statement that he along with President, SCBA and office bearers
of SCAORA would deliberate on the issues raised and shall try to arrive
at a consensus.
20. When the matters were taken up on October 4, 2018, the
learned ASG submitted note proposing the solution to the various issues.
GOPAL JHA v. THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
[A. K. SIKRI, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
534
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 13 S.C.R.
The suggestion given in the said 'Note' are as under:
"1.
...
(i) The consideration of the request for allotment of chambers
to the members of SCBA belonging to the above mentioned all
the 3 categories should be for all those who fulfil individual
respective criteria in the above mentioned 3 categories by
30th September, 2018.
(ii) In other words, any member advocate, who fulfils the
requirement of 50 appearances per year by 30th September, 2018,
would become entitled for submitting an application for allotment
of chamber to the Registry of the Supreme Court and every such
application shall be accepted. The Registry would consider a
period of 730 days (a continuous period of 2 years) at any time
before 30th September, 2018 and on being satisfied of the fulfilment
of the relevant criteria, shall accept the application for consideration
of allotment of chamber.
2. Similarly, for all Member AORs who wish to submit their
application by 30.9.2018 would be required to fulfil minimum of
20 filings or 50 appearances in a period of one year for two years,
would have to satisfy the Registry of minimum 40 filings or 100
appearances in a period of 730 days of any period as on 30th
September, 2018. Such applications would also be accepted by
the Registry of the Supreme Court for allotment of chambers. It
is clarified that the submission of application for allotment of
chamber by a member of the SCBA can be on any of the criteria
for eligibility chosen by the concerned member. In that,
notwithstanding that the member is an AOR or a designated Sr.
Advocate, the application for allotment of chamber can be
submitted on any of the criteria, namely, criteria of eligibility for
non-AOR, criteria for eligibility of AOR and criteria for eligibility
of a Sr. Advocate. However, the allotment of chamber to any
such member shall be from the quota of 7:10 or 2:10 or 1:10, as
the case may be, on the basis of the status held by the member in
presenti.
3. Similarly, this cut-off date of 30.9.2018 would apply to the
category of Member Senior Advocates for applying, with the
criteria for that category.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
535
4. This cut-off date of 30.9.2018 shall be subject to any modification
which may be made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, either in the
hearing scheduled for 20.9.2018 or any date thereafter. In other
words, the last cut-off date proposed as 30.9.2018 would get
substituted by the date so decided by the Supreme Court. The
period of 730 days for fulfilment of the eligibility criteria in the
above mentioned separate categories of advocates shall be counted
from the last cut-off date in 2004 till 30th September, 2018 or any
other date which may be decided by the Supreme Court.
5. It is the firm suggestion on behalf of the SCBA that the process
for lodging/submitting applicatoins for allotment of chambers by
Members of SCBA, in any of the above mentioned 3 categories,
should be a continuous process, i.e., whenever any member of
the SCBA belonging to any of the 3 categories fulfils the
requirement of the criteria prescribed for becoming eligible for
consideration for allotment of chamber by the Supreme Court,
his/her application shall be accepted by the Registry. This would
completely eliminate the uncertainty with regard to opening of the
period for inviting such applications. The procedure/mechanism
of accepting applications throughout the year, on continuous basis,
is the norm which is being followed almost in every High Court.
Adoption of such a mechanism/methodology of such a process to
remain operative continuously would be beneficial to the members
of the SCBA and would also remove possible anomalies and
irritants in this entire process.
6. Insofar as the AORs are concerned who have acted as AOR
for any State Government etc., filing for the respective State
Government would also be taken towards fulfilment of the criteria
for 20 filings annually.
7. Similarly, all those Member Advocates (Non-AORs), who have
remained with Government Panels, their appearances in the
Government matters would also be counted for the fulfilment of
eligibility of 50 appearances in a year for becoming eligible for
allotment of chambers.
 In both these cases, filings for the Government and/or
appearances for the Government, filing of IAs and appearances
in IAs shall not be counted. Similarly, appearances before the
GOPAL JHA v. THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
[A. K. SIKRI, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
536
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 13 S.C.R.
Ld. Registrar or before the Hon'ble Chamber Judge would also
not be counted.
8.