Advocates Can't Apply For Multiple DLSA Panels/Districts; Delhi High Court Upholds Empanelment Rule

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea challenging a Delhi State Legal Services Authority (DSLSA) condition restricting advocates from applying for empanelment in more than one District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) or panel.

Justice Amit Mahajan held that prescribing eligibility conditions and selection procedures primarily falls within the domain of the authority conducting the selection process.

The Court observed that the petitioner, advocate Sachin Chaudhary, had failed to establish any patent illegality or manifest arbitrariness in the impugned condition warranting judicial interference.

“In the opinion of this Court, the Petitioner has failed to establish that Clause A(C) suffers from any patent illegality or manifest arbitrariness warranting interference in exercise of its extraordinary and discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,” the Court said.

The Court was hearing a petition challenging Clause A(C) of the DSLSA's June 01 notification inviting applications for empanelment of advocates.

The clause requires candidates to submit only one application, specifying one preferred panel and one preferred DLSA. It further provides that multiple applications across panels or districts would result in summary rejection.

Chaudhary contended that the restriction was arbitrary as it prevented eligible advocates from applying for vacancies in multiple districts, irrespective of their qualifications, experience or merit.

He had also argued that the restriction was inconsistent with Clause A(D) of the notification, which permits advocates already empanelled with another district or state authority to relinquish one panel within a month of their selection.

Rejecting the contention, the Court observed that the two clauses operate at different stages and in different circumstances.

“ The existence of a mechanism for dealing with an existing empanelment, therefore, cannot by itself invalidate the separate condition regulating the number of applications that may be submitted in the present selection process,” the Court observed.

It further held that Clause A(D) does not confer any right upon candidates to submit multiple applications in the ongoing empanelment process.

It noted that the one-application restriction forms part of the procedure devised by the DSLSA and is uniformly applicable to all eligible candidates.

“The prescription of such conditions falls within the domain of the authority responsible for the empanelment process,” the Court said.

It also took note of the fact that the application process had closed on June 17 and the empanelment process had already progressed in all three DLSAs.

“The interview process has commenced in South-West DLSA, document verification is underway in South DLSA, and scrutiny is in progress in East DLSA. Thus, no effective relief can be awarded at this stage,” the Court said.