(1.) Introduction :
(2.) P.B. Sahasranaman ("PBSN"), the petitioner, a practicing lawyer, has a standing of 33 years at the Bar. On 29.8.2014, he gave his "consent" to be designated as a senior advocate. The High Court of Kerala considered PBSN's "consent" along with nine other proposals in a Full-Court meeting held on 19.8.2015. Eventually, on 30th Sept. 2015, the Court informed the lawyer that he had failed to secure the votes of two-third judges "present" in the meeting, as required under Rule 6 of the Rules framed under Sec. 16(2) of the Advocates Act.
(3.) Aggrieved, PBSN initially approached the Supreme Court by filing WP (C) No.135 of 2016. Later, he withdrew that writ petition with liberty to move this Court, as seen from the Ext.P10 order of the Supreme Court. Thus, the issue about how an advocate should be designated as a Senior Counsel is before us.