NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday said ordering reservation on the basis of caste in the Bengaluru Advocates Association elections would open a "pandora's box" in the absence of any empirical data.
Supreme Court’s Stand on Caste Reservation in Bar Elections
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh said the issue is a sensitive one and the court would neither permit bar members to be divided on caste lines nor allow it to be politicised.
The bench, however, felt that in the absence of any empirical data, reservation on a caste basis cannot be done.
Empirical Data Lacking for Caste-Based Reservation in Bengaluru Advocates Association
"It will open a Pandora's Box. Without any empirical data, it can't be done. Reserving seats for women was a different thing. We will not permit bar members to be divided on caste lines or let the issues to be politicised," the bench said.
Appearing for an NGO, senior advocate Madhavi Divan contended that in the past 50 years, not even one member from the SC/ST or OBC categories were elected to the governing body of the Advocate Association of Bengaluru.
she said there should be diversity in key positions, while throwing light on the reservation and affirmative actions in bar body elections in other countries.
In its plea, NGO Advocates for Social Justice sought a direction for reservations in the upcoming Bengaluru Bar Association elections to members belonging to SCs, STs, and OBCs.
The bench, however, opined at the moment the court was "handicapped" in the absence of relevant data.
The court said parliamentarians of the country were sensitive enough to ensure adequate representation of different communities in key positions. The bench said whenever a legislation comes for reservation, many debates happen on the issue and there are also deliberations with expert bodies.
"Different data are collected and made available. With informed knowledge, you can take appropriate decisions. As of today, in the absence of relevant data, we are completely handicapped," the bench said.
However, the top court said it would examine the “serious question” in another pending petition relating to reforms in bar associations.
The bench said there are serious arguable issues from both sides, which can be deliberated in a healthy atmosphere.
“We don't want different bar bodies to be divided on such grounds. This is not our intention," it added.
The apex court decided to tag the matter with a pending issue on the strengthening of bar associations, which is scheduled for a hearing on February 17.
In January this year, the court modified its order and allowed Advocate Association of Bengaluru to create a post of vice-president in the bar body.
Exercising its plenary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, the court had on January 24, reserved the post of treasurer in the Bengaluru Advocates Association for women lawyers.
The court also accepted a plea by a counsel for relaxing the 10-year experience criteria to allow more participation from young lawyers in the governing council.
