The Karnataka High Court has ruled that all advocates’ associations across the state must implement the Supreme Court's directive on reserving certain posts for women advocates while conducting elections. The court made this observation while hearing a petition filed by women advocates from the Tumakuru District Advocates’ Association (TDAA), seeking 33% reservation for women in the association’s upcoming elections.
Justice M Nagaprasanna, while allowing the petition, directed the TDAA to create an additional post of joint secretary and two executive committee member posts to be reserved for women advocates in the upcoming elections.
The petitioners had submitted a representation to the association’s secretary on March 5, requesting that 33% of the total existing posts be reserved for women, in line with the Supreme Court’s earlier ruling in the case concerning the Advocates’ Association of Bengaluru (AAB). However, their request was rejected on March 17, prompting them to move the High Court.
The Tumakuru association refused to implement the Supreme Court guidelines citing the need for a formal committee meeting to change its bylaws, which it claimed was not possible within the given timeframe.
The petitioners argued that their exclusion violated Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution, which ensure equality before law and prohibit discrimination on grounds of gender. They pointed out that of the 1,220 members eligible to vote in the TDAA elections, 990 were men, and 230 women.
While allowing the TDAA’s proposal to create additional posts for women in the current elections, the High Court emphasised that this was only a temporary solution and that a permanent framework was necessary to ensure fair representation. The court stated that the Supreme Court's directive to the AAB should be applied to all advocates’ associations in Karnataka, including those at Dharwad and Kalaburagi, and any other associations conducting elections.
The High Court also observed that it is both morally and legally essential for advocates’ associations to provide equal representation to women. It stressed that the exclusion of women from leadership positions in legal associations must be addressed systematically. “We won’t permit these [advocates’] associations to be men’s clubs for long,” the court remarked during the hearing.
Noting that reservation for women in advocates’ associations aligns with constitutional values and Supreme Court rulings, the court stated that such measures were necessary to ensure gender equality within legal institutions. It also made it clear that denying women reservation in advocates’ association elections would constitute gender discrimination, contradicting constitutional provisions.