The Supreme Court on Tuesday objected to a lawyer’s reference to senior advocate Fali S. Nariman while arguing that only sons and daughters of judges got the designation of senior advocate.
The case came up before a Bench, led by Justice Rohinton F. Nariman.
The lawyer arguing the case was advocate Mathews J. Nedumpara, who represented the petitioner, National Lawyers Campaign for Judicial Transparency and Reforms. “Why did you take the name of Fali S Nariman? Do you think you can get away [with it]? What did he get to do with the matter. We are warning you. Anyway, we are going to issue contempt notice to you,” Justice Nariman told Mr. Nedumpara.
The Bench orally directed the court master to record everything that the lawyer argued.
Mr. Nedumpara questioned the validity of the provision in the Advocates Act, 1961, that allows the grant of the designation. He said it violated the fundamental rights of equality and “creates a different class of lawyers.”
He said advocates who practised for 30-35 years and aged above 60 should be declared senior advocates. The case was reserved for orders.
