The Supreme Court today sought responses from the Centre and the Bar Council of India (BCI) on pleas challenging constitutional validity of certain laws and rules on the ground that they prohibit all lawyers from independently practicing before it.
A bench of justices Anil R Dave and Kurian Joseph also issued notice to the Registry of the apex court on the pleas filed by some members of Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA).
Presently, cases can be filed and contested through advocates-on-record (AOR) in the Supreme Court, while non-AOR lawyers cannot file or contest the cases.
"This is against the fundamental right," senior advocate Ram Jethmalani, appearing for some SCBA lawyers, said.
Another senior lawyer KTS Tulsi also endorsed Jethmalani's submission.
SCBA members Birendra Kumar Choudhary, Dilip Kumar Thakur and Chava Badri Nath Babu, in their plea, have sought an order "declaring and holding that the Section 52(b) of the Advocates Act and Order IV, Rule 1, 5, 7(a) (i), (b) (i) and 7(c) of the Supreme Court Rules are ultra virus to the Constitution of India and the same be quashed."
The plea alleges that these provisions are against the fundamental rights of lawyers.
Referring to a provision of the Advocates Act, the plea said it provided every advocate an equal right "to practice in all Courts including Supreme Court as well as before Tribunals and authorities."
"That SCR (Supreme Court Rules) 1966 was repealed and the SCR 2013 came into force w.E.F August 19, 2014 and like SCR 1966, the new SCR 2013 also contain the dual system of AOR despite notification of Section 30 of the Advocates Act 1961 on 15/6/2011.
"The new SCR 2013 did not take cognizance of the changed circumstances in the law governing the right to practice of advocates in all courts including Supreme Court after notification of Section 30 of the Advocates Act," it said.
