The Supreme Court was hearing petitions filed by the All India Backward Classes Advocates Foundation and the Karnataka SC/ST Backward Classes and Minorities Advocates Federation, seeking reservations for Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), and Other Backward Classes (OBC) candidates in the governing council of the Advocates Association, Bengaluru (AAB).  

The petitioners had initially approached the Karnataka High Court, citing a recent Supreme Court directive that mandated AAB to ensure 30% reservation for women lawyers in its governing council. They argued that similar representation should be extended to marginalized communities.  

However, the High Court dismissed their plea and directed them to approach the Supreme Court instead, leading to the present case.  

Senior Advocate Madhavi Divan, representing the petitioners, highlighted that no member from the SC/ST community has been part of AAB’s governing council in the past 50 years.

"The question is do under-represented community get affirmative action in bar associations. For 50 years, no member has been there in the bar association from SC ST community. It is serious. It is a question of access," Divan said.

The Court initially expressed reluctance to entertain the plea, cautioning that it could open a Pandora’s box. It distinguished the issue from its earlier directive on women’s reservation, stating that while such a measure was intended for urban areas, extending reservations to SC/STs in bar associations might not be feasible.

"We will not entertain this since it will open a pandoras box. See when Union government gives reservation, they go with the report of expert committee. Presence of women lawyers is something we did in urban areas. (In this case) We have to appoint a committee to collect data on pan-India basis to see who are under-represented and marginalized. Today we do not have data and thus handicapped," Justice Kant said.

However, Divan persisted in her argument, emphasizing that diversity is crucial for ensuring greater representation of marginalized communities in the legal field, thereby encouraging more individuals from these communities to join the profession.

"Ultimately, the profession needs role models. Diversity is an important consideration. Thus they have to come into the fold. For so many years there is no representation," she said.

She also highlighted practices from jurisdictions like Australia.

"We have gone far ahead of all these jurisdictions. We are nobody to comment on them.. but we can assure you that legal community in this country including those who are not well qualified, MPs, MLAs are extremely conscious of inadequate representation," the Court said.

The Court ultimately agreed to hear the matter and decided to consider it alongside another pending case concerning bar associations. Both cases will be heard on February 17.