Supreme Court To Determine Whether Advocate On Record Designated As Senior Advocate Has Duty To Notify Clients

The Supreme Court is set to determine whether an Advocate on Record (AoR) has the responsibility of communicating with their client about being designated as a Senior Advocate so that the client can make alternate arrangement to engage another lawyer to file vakalatnama.

A bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan directed the Registrar (Judicial) to submit a report to the court, detailing any specific Rule or practice direction under which alternate arrangement notices are issued by the Court to litigants whose AoR has been designated as a Senior Advocate.

“Registrar (Judicial) to submit a report to this court bringing on record, either a specific Rule or a practice direction under which notice is issued to a litigant who is represented by Advocate on Record, who has been designated as a Senior Advocate. The question to be considered is whether the Advocate on Record who has been designated as a Senior Advocate, has any responsibility of communicating to his client to make arrangements. Registry to submit a detailed report on this aspect, list on 20^th January”, the Court directed.

Justice Oka expressed concern over recurring instances where notices to litigants have to be repeatedly issued by the Court due to AoRs being designated as Senior Advocates, emphasizing that this practice must cease.

He stated, “Therefore we will find out the Rule and issue direction now that it will be responsibility of every Advocate on Record who is designated, he must inform his client. It can be left to the court.”

According to Order IV, Rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, the AoR is the only lawyer who can sign and file documents on behalf of the litigant in the Supreme Court. No advocate other than the AoR is allowed appear, plead and address the Court in a matter unless he is instructed by the AoR or permitted by the Court.

A Senior Advocate, as per Section 16 of the Advocates Act, 1961, is an advocate of exceptional ability and standing who is designated by the Supreme Court or High Court based on experience and proficiency in law.

As per Order IV, Rule 2, Senior Advocate cannot file a vakalatnama, appear without an AoR, draft pleadings, affidavits, or provide drafting advice, and accept briefs directly from clients. Any matter to be filed in the Court must be done by an AoR, and only then can the Senior Advocate appear and argue the case. Thus, when an AoR is designated as a Senior Advocate, the litigant must engage a new AoR to continue the case.

The Court was dealing with an appeal filed by State of Madhya Pradesh against acquittal of a man in a criminal case. During the hearing, the Counsel for the State pointed out that the office report recorded the designation of the respondent's AoR as a Senior Advocate, necessitating issuance of a notice from the court to the respondent to make alternative arrangement.

The office report stated the sole respondent used to be represented by Advocate Sanjay Kumar Agrawal, who has since been designated as a Senior Advocate and the alternative arrangement notice has been issued to the respondent.

Noting that such instances have become common where the court has to issue notice informing the litigant of the need to engage another AoR, the Court decided that it will pass directions regarding responsibility of an AoR to communicate necessary information to the client.

During the proceedings, the Counsel for the State of Madhya Pradesh, the appellant, highlighted that the AoR should inform the litigant, which should be communicated to the Registry, and in most cases, the AoRs do inform their client.

Justice Oka responded, “In so many matters where we keep on issuing notice, publication notice…This can't go on.”

Case no. – Crl.A. No. 1364/2015

Case Title – State of Madhya Pradesh v. Dileep