New Delhi, Jan 27 (UNI) The Supreme Court on Tuesday questioned the Bar Council of India (BCI) over its failure to provide adequate honorarium and travel allowances to retired High Court judges appointed to monitor State Bar Council elections.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice R. Mahadevan, and Justice Joymalya Bagchi took up the issue following an oral mentioning by senior advocate V. Giri, a member of the High-Powered Election Supervisory Committee constituted by the Court.
Giri submitted that the honorarium payable to members of the High-Powered Election Committees must be commensurate with their stature, as many of them are former Chief Justices or judges of High Courts.
He informed the Bench that when this concern was raised before the BCI, it responded that such payments would be “too much” and not feasible.
Seeking the Court’s intervention, Giri requested that either appropriate directions be issued or that Justice (retd.) Sudhanshu Dhulia is authorised to take necessary steps.
He also placed before the Bench the BCI’s response addressed to Justice Dhulia.
In addition, Giri flagged that the BCI had constituted a separate committee for conducting Rajasthan Bar Council elections on the grounds that Rajasthan was not mentioned in the Supreme Court’s order dated November 18, 2024, by which High-Powered Election Committees were constituted.
He submitted that the move was contrary to both the letter and spirit of the Court’s directions and pointed out that the committee had already notified the elections.
Questioning the BCI’s stance, the Bench asked its counsel why Rajasthan was excluded and why a separate committee was constituted without informing the Court.
The Supreme Court directed the BCI to explain by the next day why it had taken such a step.
The Bench also expressed strong displeasure over the denial of travel allowances to committee members. “You fixed the election fee on the ground that it would generate sufficient funds for conducting elections. Now you are telling retired judges that you cannot pay them honorarium or travel allowances. What will they do? Do they have their own aircraft?” the Chief Justice remarked.
Giri further informed the Court that committee members were required to make travel bookings at their own expense and that the facilities provided were not befitting former High Court judges, let alone former Chief Justices.
He submitted that the BCI’s proposal was only for reimbursement, which would take considerable time.
While the BCI’s counsel stated that an affidavit proposing payments had been filed, the Bench asked the Council to file a detailed response on both issues by the next day, cautioning it against inviting coercive orders.
The Supreme Court had earlier, on September 24 last year, directed the conduct of elections in Bar Councils where polls were due.
Subsequently, on November 18, it constituted High-Powered Election Committees headed by former High Court Chief Justices and comprising former High Court judges to oversee each State Bar Council election.
A High-Powered Election Supervisory Committee was also constituted, comprising Justice (retd.) Sudhanshu Dhulia, Justice (retd.) Ravi Shankar Jha, former Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, and senior advocate V. Giri.
