Supreme Court Constitutes Two New Election Tribunals for State Bar Councils
The Supreme Court ordered the creation of two additional election tribunals to speed up resolution of disputes arising from State Bar Council elections. The tribunals will be headed by former Supreme Court judges Justice Deepak Gupta and Justice Hima Kohli.
Key Developments
- A bench comprising CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi directed the Bar Council of India (BCI) to obtain formal consent of the proposed members and to notify the tribunals within three days.
- The two new tribunals will work alongside the existing three‑member tribunal headed by former SC judge Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia.
- Each tribunal will consist of a former SC judge as Chairperson, a former High Court Chief Justice as Member, and a Senior Advocate as the third member.
Composition of the New Tribunals
- Tribunal 1: Justice Deepak Gupta (Chairperson), former Andhra Pradesh High Court Chief Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur (Member), and Senior Advocate Mahalakshmi Pavani (Member).
- Tribunal 2: Justice Hima Kohli (Chairperson), former Jharkhand High Court Chief Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan (Member), and Senior Advocate Kaveeta Wadia (Member).
Important Facts from the Hearing
Advocate Kumud Lata Das highlighted a dispute concerning the reservation for women (20% quota) where five candidates were to be elected. She argued that the Hare‑Clark system of counting was not followed and that the elimination list was published after the first‑preference count.
The BCI disclosed that it had already framed rules in 2023 for constituting election tribunals, and one three‑member tribunal is functioning. BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra asserted that two tribunals are essential to address disputes from the 2026 bar council elections.
Relevance for UPSC Aspirants
This development underscores the judiciary’s role in ensuring transparent and timely resolution of internal elections of statutory bodies, a key aspect of BCI. Understanding the mechanism of election tribunals helps candidates answer questions on institutional checks, judicial oversight, and the implementation of reservation policies.
The mention of the Hare‑Clark system also provides a comparative perspective on voting methods, useful for GS2 questions on electoral reforms.
Way Forward
The Court has left the factual and legal issues to the newly constituted tribunals. Both tribunals are expected to decide the pending disputes expeditiously, while the State Bar Councils must preserve relevant records until final orders are issued. The outcome will set precedents for future professional body elections and may influence further reforms in the BCI’s electoral framework.