R.R.K.Trivedi, J. - (1.) Petitioner No. 1, it is claimed, is an association of advocates and petitioner Nos. 2 and 3, who are the advocates practising in High Court, have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution questioning the legality of Rules dated 4.2.2000 by which Designation of Senior Advocates Rules. 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) have been amended. It has been prayed that amending Rules be declared ultra vires. Inoperative, null and void. It has also been prayed that respondents be restrained from designating 'Senior Advocates' in pursuance of impugned Rules. Second relief sought is that respondent No. 1 be directed to consider the advocates practising in District Courts for being designated as senior advocates. It has also been prayed that recommendations made by the Screening Committee on 6.3.2000 and 30.3.2000 may be quashed.
(2.) Under Rule 9 of Chapter III of the Rules of the Court Hon'ble the Chief Justice called a Full Court meeting to be held on 9.4.2000. One of the items for consideration in this meeting was to judge the suitability of some advocates for being designated as senior advocates under Section 16 (2) of the Advocates Act. 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Petitioners filed this writ petition on 6.4.2000 claiming relief mentioned above, Hon'ble the Chief Justice same day passed the following order : "Let the matter be placed before a Bench consisting of Hon'ble Mr. Justice R. R. K. Trivedi, Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. R. Singh and Hon'ble Mr. Justice M. Katju tomorrow at 10 a.m."
(3.) In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the writ petition was placed before us on 7.4.2000. After hearing learned counsel for the parties at some length we granted time to the parties to exchange counter and rejoinder-affidavits and passed following interim order for the reasons already recorded in the order : "Therefore, we direct that all the names recommended by the Hon'ble Judges of the Court under Rule 3 (A) of the Rules for consideration of conferring distinction of 'Senior Advocates' shall be placed before the Full Court in its meeting scheduled to be held on 9th April. 2000 irrespective of the fact whether the names have been 'approved' or 'disapproved' by the Committee. The names shall be considered by the Full Court and decision taken through secret ballot as provided under the Rules and the result shall be declared subject to final decision on the writ petition.";