Supreme Court Issues Notice on Petition for Gender-Sensitive Chambers Allotment

The petition also seeks priority allotment to women advocates with over 25 years of practice who are on the Supreme Court Bar Association’s waiting list.

The Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi heard the matter.

During the proceedings, Justice Kant suggested that the very concept of chambers could be reimagined, proposing working stations, shared sitting spaces, and client meeting rooms. He highlighted that the new Supreme Court building has been designed to meet all infrastructural needs of lawyers.

The Bench expressed skepticism over granting preferential allotment for women, noting that women have excelled on merit across the judiciary and legal profession. Justice Kant observed, “In our judicial service, almost 60% of officers are women. They are there not because of any reservation… it is solely on merit. That’s why I find it paradoxical why you ask for any privilege? If we think of preferential allocation, then we should also think of specially-abled persons.”

Senior Counsel for the petitioners clarified that chamber allocation is an infrastructural benefit and does not affect professional merit.

The Bench further suggested that focus could include court-annexed creche facilities and other support measures for women lawyers, acknowledging that family responsibilities often force young women professionals to quit practice.

The Court issued notices to the Union of India, Supreme Court Secretary General, SCBA, and Bar Council of India, and listed the matter for further hearing in November. 

The petition highlights systemic exclusion of women advocates, including those with 15–25 years of practice, from accessing chambers despite being on the Supreme Court Bar Association’s waiting list. Petitioners argue that the current allotment scheme is outcome-inequitable, lacks affirmative action, and fails to consider structural disadvantages faced by women, particularly first-generation lawyers from non-metropolitan or socially marginalized backgrounds.

The petition points out that the recent allotment of 68 cubicles in the Supreme Court’s D-Block between July and October 2024 did not prioritize women, despite the Court’s own directions in 2019 recognizing the need to ensure infrastructure support for women lawyers. Petitioners say this administrative inaction perpetuates institutional exclusion, deprives women of confidential meeting spaces, file storage, and technology access, and jeopardizes the effective delivery of justice.

Citing Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution, the petitioners contend that denial of basic professional infrastructure amounts to a violation of their fundamental rights. It also invokes India’s obligations under CEDAW (Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women) to urge corrective measures.

The plea seeks:

1. Framing and implementation of a gender-responsive chamber allotment policy in the Supreme Court.

2. Reservation or priority allotment for women advocates in future allotments.

3. Enforcement of prior judicial directions and periodic review of compliance.

4. Pan-India guidelines for gender-inclusive legal infrastructure in High Courts and District Courts.

The petition contends the constitutional and international imperative of ensuring gender justice, equal professional access, and institutional accountability within India’s legal system.