Full Judgment Text
Non-Reportable
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 11439/2014
[Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No. 22725 of 2014]
T. N. Raghupathy … Appellant (s)
Versus
High Court of Karnataka and others … Respondent (s)
WITH
TRANSFER PETITION (C) NO. 1150/2014
AND
TRANSFER PETITION (C) NO. 1838/2014
J U D G M E N T
KURIAN, J.:
JUDGMENT
Leave granted.
2. Appellant has challenged an interim order passed by
the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Writ Petition No.
35106 of 2014 filed in public interest.
3. Appellant has mainly sought for a writ of mandamus for
framing new norms strictly in consonance with the provisions of
Section 16(2) of the Advocates Act, 1961 in the matter of
designation of senior advocates. A writ of certiorari is also
1
Page 1
sought for quashing notifications dated 30.06.2014 and
14.07.2014 whereby 15 advocates have been designated as
senior advocates by the High Court of Karnataka.
4. In the nature of the order we propose to pass in this
case, we do not deem it necessary or proper to go into the
various contentions raised by the appellant.
5. As per the impugned interim order dated 04.08.2014,
the High Court has taken the view that the appellant does not
have locus standi to file writ petition in public interest. Mr. K.K.
Venugopal, Mr. Kapil Sibal, Mr. Gopal Subramaniam, Mr. Aditya
Sondhi, learned senior counsel appearing for some of the
parties and the other counsel appearing for others before this
Court have graciously submitted that the High Court is not right
in holding that view. Some of the issues raised in the writ
JUDGMENT
petition require consideration. As rightly pointed out by the
learned senior counsel, these are the issues to be considered
by the High Court only since it is the High Court concerned
which frames the rules/regulations/guidelines regarding the
designation of senior advocates. Therefore, we set aside the
impugned order with a request to the High Court to consider
the matter on merits.
6. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs.
2
Page 2
T.P.(C) No.1150/2014 & T.P.(C) No. 1838/2014
7. In view of the order passed in Civil Appeal No.
11439/2014 (arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 22725/2014), these
transfer petitions have in effect been rendered infructuous.
8. The transfer petitions are accordingly dismissed. No
costs.
.. . ..…..…..………… J.
(ANIL R. DAVE)
..………..……………J.
(KURIAN JOSEPH)
New Delhi;
December 16, 2014.
JUDGMENT
3
Page 3