Electoral Fairness Questioned: Plea Challenges Exclusion of New AORs Ahead of April 29 Polls
(Judicial Quest News Network)
New Delhi, April 25, 2026 – In a last-minute bid to secure voting rights ahead of the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) elections on April 29, newly registered Advocate-on-Record (AOR) Ritu Rajkumari has filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court.
The plea accuses the SCAORA election committee of arbitrarily excluding her and other recently registered AORs from the voter list, despite their fulfilment of all eligibility criteria and timely payment of dues.
“That the exclusion of Petitioner and other similarly situated newly registered Advocates-on-Record persists despite the fact that Petitioner and similarly situated Advocates-on-Record fully satisfies the eligibility criteria prescribed under sub-rule (ii) of Rule 5, Order IV of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013. Denying the Petitioner the right to vote in the upcoming SCAORA elections due to the non-allotment of AOR code, an administrative formality beyond our control, results in arbitrary treatment among other Members of SCAORA.”
Filed through AOR Vishaka, the petition seeks urgent directions to include Rajkumari and similarly placed new AORs in the voter list for the SCAORA elections, which will elect office-bearers and the executive committee for the 2026-2028 term.
“Exclusion of the newly registered Advocates-on- Records from the voter list of SCAORA Elections on a hyper-technical ground of non-allotment of AOR code is arbitrary. 5.2 BECAUSE exclusion of the newly registered Advocates-on- Records from the voter list of SCAORA Elections while allowing existing members to pay and clear their dues till 18th April, 2026 (5 PM) while not allowing the same to newly registered Advocates-on-Records with AOR codes creates an arbitrary class within members of SCORA and Advocates-on-Records.”
It also demands a declaration that their exclusion is “arbitrary, illegal, and violative of equality,” arguing it denies them the fundamental right to vote in the association’s polls.
Timeline of Events and Alleged Irregularities
The controversy originates from a series of deadlines and decisions by the SCAORA election committee, outlined in an election notice issued on April 8, 2026. That notice set April 14 as the cutoff for new membership eligibility and clearance of dues by existing members.
“For all intents and purposes, the newly registered AORs are Advocate-on-Record as of 16th April, 2026 whereas the date of payment has already been extended till 18th April for existing members, the same is not extended to newly registered Advocate-on-Records. Thus, a denial in the inclusion of the voter list in the upcoming SCAORA election is unfair, arbitrary and against the principles of equality. “the plea contends.
April 13, 2026: Petitioner Ritu Rajkumari submitted her SCAORA membership form, paying Rs 3,000 towards membership fees and Rs 500 for subscriptions. A receipt was issued the same day. Several other newly registered AORs followed suit before the April 14 deadline, the plea states.
April 14, 2026: The election committee refused to extend the deadline or issue codes to new applicants. On the same day, a 94-page voter list with 2,058 names was published, omitting all newly registered AORs.
April 16, 2026: The Supreme Court approved applications from 205 advocates, granting them AOR status news that came too late for the voter list cutoff.
April 17, 2026: The committee extended the dues-clearance deadline for existing members until April 18 at 5 PM, but explicitly excluded new AORs. Rajkumari and others sent a detailed representation via email and WhatsApp seeking inclusion, but received no response.
April 20, 2026: A supplementary voter list, titled “Subscription Received by 5:00 PM on 18-4-2026,” added 201 members but still ignored new AORs who had paid dues before April 14.
Legal Arguments: Arbitrary Classification and Rule Violations
Rajkumari contends that exclusion on the grounds of “non-allotment of AOR codes” is baseless and discriminatory. Under SCAORA Rules and Regulations, she argues, membership requires only AOR status and Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) membership not an SCAORA-specific code. “Membership is not denied for want of an AOR code,” the petition emphasizes.
The plea further alleges “arbitrary classification” in granting existing members extra time to clear dues until April 18, while denying the same to new AORs who complied fully and on time.
This, it claims, results in unequal treatment, infringing on voting rights for those who met all requirements.
The matter assumes urgency as polls are just days away on April 29. No response from the SCAORA election committee was available at the time of filing this report. The Supreme Court is yet to list the petition for hearing.
