The Supreme Court on Tuesday took a stern view of the Bar Council of India’s (BCI) failure to provide adequate honorarium and travel allowances to former High Court judges appointed to monitor State Bar Council elections, remarking that the situation raised serious concerns regarding dignity and fairness.
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, along with Justices R. Mahadevan and Joymalya Bagchi, directed the apex bar body to resolve the issue amicably. The Court’s intervention came after reports surfaced that retired judges were being forced to make their own travel arrangements and were denied payments befitting their stature.
“Do They Have Their Own Aircraft?”
The issue was brought to the fore by Senior Advocate V. Giri, a member of the Court-appointed High-Powered Election Supervisory Committee. Giri informed the bench that the BCI had refused to enhance payments, labelling the proposed honorarium for the former judges as “too much” and unfeasible.
Expressing strong disapproval, CJI Surya Kant questioned the practicality of the BCI’s stance.
“You fixed the election fee on the ground that it will generate sufficient funds for conducting elections. Now you are telling retired judges you can’t pay them honorarium, you can’t pay travel allowances. What will they do? Do they have their own aircraft?” the CJI remarked during the hearing.
The bench observed that asking retired Chief Justices and judges of High Courts to pay for travel and accommodation from their own pockets was “not correct” and undermined the dignity of the individuals tasked with ensuring electoral transparency.
The Grievance
Senior Advocate Giri highlighted that the current arrangement required judges to bear expenses upfront, with the BCI only offering reimbursement—a process fraught with delays.
“One of the judges expressed that all bookings have to be done by the judges themselves. When they reach there, the facilities provided are not befitting even a former Chief Justice,” Giri submitted. He urged the Court to either issue specific directions or authorize Justice (Retd.) Sudhanshu Dhulia, head of the Supervisory Committee, to take necessary steps.
BCI Chairperson Assures Resolution
Initially, the BCI counsel submitted that an affidavit proposing payments had been filed, but Giri countered that it only addressed reimbursements, not the core issue of adequacy and upfront facilities.
Later in the forenoon, BCI Chairperson and Senior Advocate Manan Kumar Mishra appeared before the bench. He submitted that the BCI had simply forwarded the relevant communication to the supervisory committee headed by Justice Dhulia.
“Please resolve the issue amicably,” the CJI told Mishra, to which the BCI Chairperson assured the bench that the matter would be settled.
The Rajasthan Election Controversy
Beyond the financial dispute, the Court was also alerted to procedural irregularities regarding the Rajasthan State Bar Council elections. Giri flagged that the BCI had constituted a separate committee for Rajasthan, bypassing the Supreme Court-appointed High-Powered Election Committee, on the technical ground that the state was not specifically named in the Court’s previous order.
Giri termed this action contrary to the “letter and spirit” of the Court’s directions, noting that this independently constituted committee had already notified elections in the state.
Taking note of this, the CJI questioned the BCI’s counsel: “Why have you not included Rajasthan, and why are you constituting a committee separately?”
The Supreme Court has directed the BCI to respond to both issues—the non-payment of allowances and the separate Rajasthan committee—by Wednesday.
Background
The controversy arises against the backdrop of the Supreme Court’s ongoing efforts to ensure transparent and timely elections within State Bar Councils. To achieve this, the Court previously constituted High-Powered Election Committees in various states, headed by former High Court Chief Justices and judges.
Overseeing this entire process is a central High-Powered Election Supervisory Committee comprising Justice (Retd.) Sudhanshu Dhulia, Justice Ravi Shankar Jha (former Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court), and Senior Advocate V. Giri.
