Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Court said directions regarding ensuring reservation of women advocates had been issued by the Supreme Court under Art. 142 and same cannot be done by the High Court.
On 22-12-2024, the Collegium recommended six candidates to be appointed as Judges in four High Courts of India.
On 15-10-2024 the Collegium recommended appointment of Judicial Officers and Advocates as Judges and Additional Judges as Permanent Judges for Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, and Karnataka High Courts respectively.
The Court further stated that power of the Courts either competent Civil Court or Constitutional Court cannot be permitted to be usurped by the Chairman of the Bar Council of India, as was done in the instant case.
The Supreme Court Collegium on 13-8-2024, recommended their names after considering their merit and record.
On 24-9-2024, the Collegium recommended the names stating that their inter se seniority will be fixed as per the existing practice.
The Collegium recommended Advocates Ajay Digpaul, Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, and Shwetasree Majumder, be appointed as Judges of the High Court of Delhi.
On 13-8-2024, the Collegium recommended 14 names for appointment as Judges in the High Courts of Allahabad, Andhra Pradesh and Gujarat.
The Collegium on 30-07-2024 recommended the names of Bibhu Datta Guru and Amitendra Kishore Prasad, for appointment as Judges of Chhattisgarh High Court.
Respondent 4 was in active practice and possessed cumulatively more than 7 years of active practice.
The timeline was stipulated by the Delhi High Court in a previous judgment for the issuance of identity cards to the law researchers being treated as bona fide advocates.
“Courts should not hesitate in quashing the criminal proceedings which are essentially arising out of civil or commercial disputes between the two parties.”
“Any interpretation of the Preamble or the scheme of the Act for construing ‘Profession’ as ‘Business’ or ‘Trade’; or ‘Professional’ as ‘service provider’ would be extending the scope of the Act which was not intended, rather would have a counter productive effect”
The counsels who adopt such practices, jeopardize the harmony with the Bench along with their professional careers, by ignoring the fact that they are not only required to conduct the case in a fair manner, but while doing so they are also officers of the Court.
“While fair and temperate criticism of the Court, may not be actionable, but attributing improper motives or tending to bring Judges or Courts into hatred and contempt or obstructing directly or indirectly with the functioning of Courts is serious contempt of which notice will be taken.”
In a series of Resolutions dated 12-03-2024, the Collegium recommended appointment of several Permanent Judges and appointment of Judicial Officers and Advocates as Judges.
The High Court opined that it cannot venture into interpreting the scope of Gauhati High Court Rules and BCI Rules vis-à-vis dress code for advocates in the absence of necessary parties.
A total number of 4 candidates were recommended by the Collegium to be appointed as Judges of the High Courts of Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh.
2024’s first Supreme Court Collegium Resolutions recommended the appointment of Additional and Permanent Judges for the High Courts of Bombay, Calcutta, Chhattisgarh, Gauhati, Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh and Punjab and Haryana.
“The object of enactment of the Telangana State Judicial (Service and Cadre) Rules, 2023 is to recruit suitable candidates to Telangana State Judicial Service who are acquainted with the practice of local Courts in Telangana and have the knowledge of local laws.”