T.N.RAGHUPATHY Vs. HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA & ORS.
Supreme Court of India (Division Bench (DB)- Two Judge)
Appeal (Civil), 11439 of 2014, Judgment Date: Dec 16, 2014
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.:
Leave granted.
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.
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 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.
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.
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 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.
The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs.
T.P.(C) No.1150/2014 & T.P.(C) No. 1838/2014
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.
The transfer petitions are accordingly dismissed. No costs.
........................... J.
(ANIL R. DAVE)
............................J.
(KURIAN JOSEPH)
New Delhi;
December 16, 2014.
-----------------------
3