....,..

' .....
sopnE1VIE
yrri1Ttll
" \ '(1 ,\SS( A'J'I ()N
( j 01 d"!l JIi III 'n' ILilt<(l{\ III, \ II j H ' 'Illl' ( \ Hit' () I III d1 ; I, N<.' W k II ! I ! I II I \( I I
I'h,lll'" ." I, '1)3(l'J71. I ,1\ III ;:,/,
I'll Ilkn!
To
The BOll'ble Chicf Justice of India
Supreme Court of India
New Delhi.
,)ate .lllT .IUIlC, ::01::
My Lord.
;\s repn:sent, tive of the Supreme Court Bar and in my
capacity as the President, SCAORA, I !Jcck to bring the fo!lowilll,!
matters for your kind consideration.
\11.1. \.
1) l\ccd for consultation with the representativc of the Bar in
I I,':: ',lilt'!
rcgllrd to administrath'c decisions or pructicc direction
;\s advocates practicing ill this Hon'blc Court. we are affectcd
\ 'l'illll 11,'1',[11,'1
by many administrative decisions made by your gooclselves
and the Registry of this HOll'ble Court. Earlier it was Ihe
practice of this Hon'ble Court to consult the representatives 01
the Bar. Their vie\-\! in policy decisions which alfect Ihc
practic{' and procedure in this Hon'ble Court \\'a, taken into
\ I I', Bill;! '!adILI\ ,Ill
consideration. In my earlier knurl' as President of SCi\( )/{/\ I
\\'as consulted as a Member of the Rules Committee "h\:11 the
rule relating to fees payable to Amiells Curie and Surrem.:
Court Rules under Order XLVIII Rule 2 r :latillg to
of record werc amended, In lact my suggestion in the draft
Rulc \vas :ncorporated in Rule. Howeve;:, this healthy practice
seems to h,'xe been discontinuec'. At present Imge number of
practice directions are issued v.ithout consulting the Bar. Only
the officers of the Registry who unfortunately are nol
\ II. \. Ibdhal, ri ... hllall
fully falviliar with the dilliculties of litigants and Bar
and are also not familiar with past cmd procedure
\ Ii. Ibj;1I1 \<11'<1111 of the Supreme Court which have been developed in last
50-60 yems of Suoreme Court voice their views. The Bar
by their experience can suggest better practical solution to
\'arious problems. It is submitted tlut any changl.' in tlw
existing practice or procedure can be well implemented if
it is done with active involvement and support frum hoth
the Registry an,,! the Bar so that there j" no n\,.:rbl.'aranl.'\.'
from either side. This can be achieveu by 41110\\ ing
representative of the Bar Associations In the Rules
committee of this Hon'ble Court as was the practice earlier.
It is submitted ,hat the Bar and Registry are not warring
factions, rather they are two wheels (;f the same cart.
Cooperation of both of them is ess(ntial for smooth and
speedy administration of justice in this Hon'ble Court. A
step in this direction by Your Lordship would go a long
way in betterment of justice administration ill this Hon'ble
Court and in the improvement in the relationship between
the Regislry and the Bar.
2) Need for bridging the communication gno:
In last two years members of Bar, with due respect have
the feeling that there is seriolls eOl1wllInication gap
between Your Lordships and the Bar at an institutional
level. It is well known that members of the Bench and the
Bar arc two equal pillars of the judicial system. Your
Lordship did not join a single function arranged by
Advocates-on-Record, though they are the b,lckbone of
Supreme Court working. The members have observed
with dismay and due respect that Your Lordship did not
stay even for a minute for tea after finishing of the function
or Farewell Parties for retiring Judges. It is respectfully
suggested the Open interaction on such occasions where
there can be free of ideas in the interest of the
institution need not and ought not to be avoided. It may be
re(;alled that there has been a tradition in England. which
has becn adopted in India to have a free interaction
between the Bench and the Bar for mutual interest of thc
Inst itllt ion.
It submitted that for a synergetic relationship retwccn
the Bench and the Bar, it is necessary to h,lh' pwpcr
communication on key issues, The communication challncl
should he clear, prompt and free from unnecessary
procedu,al formalities and hassks alld it lu hI.' III
informal setting. It is submitted that Bar should have an
opportunity of voicing their concerns before Your
Lordship and routing this through the Registry sometimes
callses unnecessary delays and latches. Somctimes
grievanccs are against working of the Registry, which Call'!
be routed through Registry. In the past. two of the
employees (If this Hon'ble Court were trapped and caught
red-handed. Many a time the letters submitted to the
Registry for perusal of My Lord are not even
acknowledged by the Registry and no response in respect
of the same is given. Members of the Bar are !c'i guessing
whether the letter at all had reached its destination. In my
letter dated 41h March, 2012 addressed to l\1y Lord. I had
specifically pointed out the bottlenecks created by nne
sided decisions by the Registry which has resulted in
tOl..tism and malpractices in some of the of/kes of the
Registry. However, the said letter has not been
acknowledged nor any action in respect of the same is
taken.
With due respect, it is submitted that elTective
communication can also be established in informal settings
like seminars, parties/dinners organizl,:d by the Bar on
occasions like felicitation on retirement of members of the
Bench. These get-togethers serve as melting pots where
many key issues can be resolveci in an informal and free
atmosphere, with the involv(!ment dnd cooperation of all
concerned. Due to pal!c.ity of time My Lord have not been
able to attend many of these functions, dinners or get
togethers. I make a humble request to my lord to take some
time out of your busy schedule and grace occasions
so that the members of the Bar have an opportunity or
meeting my lords and expressing their concerns.
3) Need for adequate vacations and holidays:
The practice of listing regular hearing matters during
slimmer vacations started about 5-6 years back when Bar
was 1 he Bar had agreed with the decision of the
erstwhile Chief Justice on a clear as';urance that only those
matters will be listed during vacation where advocates of
all the parties to the petition have no objection. At that
time, only those matters were listed during vacation where
lawyers of both had 10 objection. The said practice
continued and the vacation oenches used to hear regular
matters only with the c.onsent of both parties posted during
vacaticns. '!'he advocates with mutual co-operation also got
large number of matters listed during vacatic)l)s thus
resulting in disposal of a :;ufficie.nt number of matters
during vacation without any from any party.
During my earlier tenure as President SCAORA, the
Registry went on its assurance and tried to list final
hearing matters during vacations without the consent of the
respective advocates. The representation to the Registry
was of no avail. It was thlm that I as president of the
SCAORA alongwith the President SCBA met the erstwhile
Chief Justice of India. The erstwhile He;n'ble Cli on
representation. appreciated the issue and immediately
modilicd the circular and directed the Registry to list onl)
those matters where Ihere was of both the parties.
It is felt that the Registry has again got the cifi.:ular re
issued by My Lord without bringing to your lordships'
notice the di fficuIties faced by Bar and the earl ier
representation to the erstwhile Chief justice. When the
aloresaid circular was reissued by the Registry. I myself
and President of S.C.B.A. made representation. But
nothing concrete has come out of the said meeting. It is
submi:ted that the aforesaid circular has resulted in
complete curtailment of vacation of AORs who cannot
leave the matter in lurch. Also, in matters of gravity like
imprisonment. prevention of corruption etc. the clients
require assistance of highly skilled senior il0vocates. most
of whom are not available duri'1g the vacation. This results
in inconvenience to the clients as well. It is therefore
prayed that the aforesaid circular may be withdrawn at the
earliest so that it may not be repc:lted in future.
Thanking yOll,
tml).

(SUSI-IIL Kl JAIN)
--Pl?ESIDENT