New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday took exception to the “scurrilous and unfounded allegations” made in a petition against the conferment of senior designations to lawyers.

“How many judges can you name whose offsprings have been designated as senior counsel?” a bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan asked advocate Mathews J Nedumpara, who appeared for the petitioners.

Referring to the averments in the plea, the bench observed it had insinuations against the judges.

‘Unfounded Allegations’

“We find that various scurrilous, unfounded allegations have been made against the institution,” it said.

The bench referred to the averments made in the plea which read, “It is difficult, if not impossible, to find a judge sitting or retired, of the high court or Supreme Court, who has his offspring, brother, sister or nephew who has crossed the age of 40 remaining to be a plebeian lawyer.” 

Grievance Raised Against Conferrment of Designation To Senior Lawyers

The petiton filed by Nedumpara and several others, including many practising advocates, raised a grievance against the senior designations conferred to lawyers. The plea claimed that the classification of lawyers into two categories and conferring a minority with “favours and privileges” was against the concept of equality and the ethos of the Constitution.

During the hearing, Nedumpara, who offered to place certain data before the court, argued the bar was fearful of judges.

‘Nedumpara, this is a court of law. Not a boat club or Azad Maidan in Bombay (Mumbai) to make speeches. So, when you address a court of law, make legal arguments. Not the arguments only for the purpose of gallery,” said Justice Gavai.

The court said it was willing to grant him the liberty to amend the petition.

 

(With inputs from PTI)