SC/ST quota in Bar Councils can’t be Court made, says Supreme Court

In a significant procedural challenge touching the question of social representation within professional bodies, the High Court was called upon to examine whether courts can compel reservation for SC/ST advocates in State Bar Councils and the Bar Council of India without a clear statutory mandate, putting the spotlight on legislative gaps and institutional accountability.

The controversy began when an advocate association approached the High Court seeking a direction to reserve seats for members belonging to the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe communities in the State Bar Councils and the Bar Council of India. Counsel for the petitioner argued that the absence of such reservation perpetuates exclusion within legal institutions, and further sought parity with women advocates, pointing out that women have secured representation in Bar bodies.

The petition thus raised a broader question, can constitutional ideals of representation be enforced judicially in the absence of an enabling statutory framework?

Examining the issue, the Court noted that both the State Bar Council of Telangana and the Bar Council of India had taken a categorical stand that reservation for SC/ST members can be introduced only by amending the statute governing Bar Councils. The Bench underscored the limits of judicial power in such circumstances, observing, “we find it difficult to issue a mandamus to provide reservation, especially in the absence of an express provision for the same.” 

Addressing the plea for parity with women members, the Court clarified that women’s representation in Bar Associations and Bar Councils had emerged through “consensus and with active support of the respective Bar Associations and Bar Councils,”and not by judicial compulsion.

Consequently, while declining to grant the relief sought, the Court disposed of the petition, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent authority for appropriate remedy.