Exempt Advocates from Wearing Black Coats and Gowns in the Months of Summer, Plea in the Supreme Court

In the Supreme Court (SC) of India, a writ petition seeking directions to amend the rules and the Advocates Act of 1961 to relax the dress code of Advocates by exempting them from wearing the traditional black coat and gown in the months of scorching heat. According to the Rules framed under Section 49(1)(gg) of the Advocates Act, it is made mandatory for all the advocates to wear the traditional dress code of black robes. The petitioner, Advocate Shailendra Mani Tripathi also sought the setting up of a medical experts committee to study how wearing warm clothes in summer affects health, work capacity, and work quality for advocates and provide suggestions for the same. The reliefs sought by the petitioner are listed as follows:

• “Give direction to the Bar Council of India to amend its rules and the Advocates Act 1961, to exempt advocates from wearing Black coats and Gowns in the months of summer, in the Supreme Court and the High Courts.
• Give direction to the Bar Council of each state to amend their rules and determine the months of 'prevailing summer' for that particular state during which Black coats and Gowns can be exempted according to the temperature and humidity variation of different States.
• Direct the Union of India to set up a committee of medical experts to study how wearing warm clothes in summer affects the health, work capacity, and quality of work for advocates, railway TTEs, and other employees who have to follow these dress codes. The committee should look into these issues and provide a detailed report with recommendations.
• Pass such other order/s as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

The petitioner contended that the continuous absorption of heat by the black color causes irritability and duress. He added, “Everyone has the right to work in safe conditions. Making lawyers wear heavy black coats in summer makes their working conditions unsafe and uncomfortable. This isn't just inconvenient; it violates their right to a safe workplace.” The petitioner also said, “...there's the issue of fairness and equality. Not all lawyers are affected equally. Those with health problems or less ability to tolerate heat suffer more. This unequal impact violates their right to equal treatment. For example, younger lawyers trying to establish their careers might not complain for fear of retribution, even though they suffer immensely. This creates an unfair working environment and discourages open discussion about health and safety.” Furthermore, he argued that lawyers/advocates should have the freedom to dress comfortably, a part of the Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression.