Legal Industry Being "Monopolized": Lawyer Moves Supreme Court Challenging System Of Designating Senior Advocates

President of NLC (National Lawyers' Campaign for Judicial Transparency and Reforms) and Advocate, Mathews J. Nedumpara has moved the Supreme Court against designation of Advocates as "Senior" under Sections 16 and 23(5) of the Advocates Act, 1961.

The matter was mentioned today before CJI DY Chandrachud, who has listed it on March 20.

Nedumpara says such designation has created a class of advocates with special rights, and the same has been seen as reserved only for the kith and kin of judges and senior advocates, politicians, ministers etc., resulting in the legal industry being "monopolised". 

"A special class of advocates with special rights, privileges and status not available to ordinary advocates, is unconstitutional, being violative of the mandate of equality under Article 14 and the right to practice any profession under Article 19, as well as the right to life under Article 21," the plea states.

It alleges that due to this system, a vast majority of meritorious law practitioners are left behind as ordinary plebeians receiving discriminatory treatment in the Courts.

The plea compares senior designation to that of Queen's counsel in 18th century England.  "The conferment of the title of the King/Queen‟s counsel is the conferment of a title as a favour to lawyers who represented the Crown...The concept of Queen‟s Counsel is totally alien to India."

It is further said that the impugned provisions have resulted in denial of justice to the ordinary class of litigants who cannot afford a senior advocate or who wishes to engage a senior advocate of his/her choice in whom he/she has confidence and faith.

"Lawyers representing the cause of their respective clients are entitled to equal and just treatment. However, that almost universally, is not practiced. A designated lawyer, who very often represents a bigger fish, has his way in every possible sense."