Top court draws up fresh rules for appointing senior advocates
Constitutes a permanent panel led by CJI to gather information on prospective candidates
ative from the bar. The committee would include the Attorney General to decide on senior advocates in the top court while the Advocate General would be consulted regarding High Court appointments.
Number of years in practice, number of judgments the lawyer has been part of, pro bono work done by the lawyer along with a test of his personality would be criteria for eligibility. The lawyer-candidate will have to give an interview before a final decision is taken.
The court, however, did away with the income criterion, saying, “…we do not see why we should insist on any minimum income as a condition of eligibility. The income generated by a lawyer would depend on the field of his prac- tice and it is possible that a lawyer doing pro bono work or one who specialises in a particular field may generate a lower return of income... Insistence on any particular income, therefore, may be a self- defeating exercise.”
On minimum age, the SC said: “Insofar as age is concerned, we are inclined to take the view that instead of having a minimum age with a provision of relaxation in an ap- propriate case, it would be better to go by the norm of 10 years practice at the Bar, which is also what is prescribed by Article 217 of the Constitution...”
The bench also clarified that names of candidates would be posted online to invite suggestions from various stakeholders. Finally, the names up for consideration and approved by the permanent committee will be put before the full court (involving SC/HC judges as the case may be) which will then decide to accord the designation unanimously or through majority in a secret ballot.
The court’s decision was taken on the heels of a petition filed by senior advocate Indira Jaising.
The year 2017 has not been particularly good for the Lodha Developers, at least not on legal front where one of Mumbai’s biggest real estate firms has had to deal with at least three cases that brought their name under cloud.
The first big blow for the real estate biggie was a Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority order that forced the Lodhas to refund booking amount to a complainant who had cancelled his booking in Lodha’s Ultima project in Thane.
Roshan Nawale had lodged a complaint with the newly installed housing regulatory authority saying the developer was not returning his money even though he had cancelled his booking at Ultima in Thane. Sensing trouble, Lodha Developers ate the humble pie and agreed to return his money on the day of the hearing September 12 and paid Rs 1.08 lakh.
Another complaint against Lodha Developers was heard by MahaRERA on October 10. The complainant Sheo Pratap Singh informed the authority that he wished to withdraw the complaint to pursue the matter in a consumer court.
“During the hearing, the complainant appeared through his Advocate Abhishek Gokhale and Advocate Rahul Wardhan represented respondent. The complainant filed an application for withdrawal of complaint as he wants to approach the Consumer Court.