As per case facts the High Court on its administrative side challenged its own judicial order that had struck down Rule of its Rules arguing that the rule which allows ... the Full Court to suo motu designate advocates as Senior Advocates was non-compliant with the Supreme Court's Indira Jaising guidelines on designation transparency The question arose whether the power of the Full Court of the High Court to suo motu designate an exceptional and eminent advocate as a Senior Advocate as per Rule was valid and in consonance with the Indira Jaising judgments and subsequent clarifications Finally the Supreme Court set aside the judicial order of the High Court The Court affirmed that the Full Court's power of suo motu designation for exceptional and eminent advocates is recognized and not curtailed by the guidelines provided the decision is by consensus and aligns with constitutional principles of fairness The Court upheld the designations that had subsequently been made and directed the High Court to frame new rules in light of subsequent judicial clarifications that had deleted the non-mandatory points-based assessment