Senior Advocate Designations : Contempt Petition Filed In Supreme Court Against Delhi High Court

A contempt petition has been filed in the Supreme Court, alleging a delay in taking up applications for the designation as 'Senior Advocates' by the Delhi High Court. The petition claims non-compliance of the Supreme Court's April 15 order, passed by a bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan which directed the Delhi High Court to consider afresh the applications for senior designations, which were deferred or rejected in November last year, in accordance with the existing rules (The High Court of Delhi Designations of Senior Advocates Rules 2024).The order was passed while hearing writ petitions challenging the Delhi High Court's notification issued on November 29, 2024, designating 70 advocates as Senior Advocates and placing the remaining 67 on a “Deferred List” for future consideration on grounds of alleged irregularities.Senior Advocate Sudhir Nandrajog, a former member of the Permanent Committee, had resigned, alleging that the final list of designated Senior Advocates was prepared without his consent. On February 24, he had submitted that the Committee had concluded interviews on November 19, 2024, and a meeting was held on November 25, 2024, during which a draft list of candidates was circulated by the then Chief Justice. According to Nandrajog, it was agreed that the list would be reviewed in a subsequent meeting on December 2, 2024. However, no further meetings took place.Besides Nandrajog, the Permanent Committee of the High Court comprised the then Chief Justice Manmohan, Justice Vibhu Bakhru, Justice Yashwant Varma, Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, and Senior Advocate Mohit Mathur.The Supreme Court had issued notice to the Registrar General of the Delhi High Court and Nandrojog seeking their response and also called for the Permanent Committee's report in a sealed cover.On reviewing the sealed reports, the Court noted that the Committee had recommended names for senior designation, which was beyond its mandate. Referring to the 2017 Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India judgment, Justice Oka pointed out that the Committee's role is limited to assigning points to candidates based on objective criteria and does not extend to making recommendations. He also cited the recent Jitender Kalla judgment, where the Supreme Court reaffirmed that the Committee's function ends with the allocation of points.The contempt petition is filed by Advocate Sanjay Dubey(who was one of the applicants who was denied the senior designation) in a writ petition filed by him, which was disposed of in light of the Supreme Court's directions in Raman alias Raman Gandhi vs. Registrar General, High Court of Delhi & Anr in which the April 15 order was passed. He had filed another similar writ petition, which was dismissed in January.Case Details: SANJAY DUBEY v. THE FULL REFERENCE OF THE HON'BLE JUDGES OF THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI | Diary No. 60527/2025

Senior Advocate Designations : Contempt Petition Filed In Supreme Court Against Delhi High Court

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

Senior Advocate Designations : Contempt Petition Filed In Supreme Court Against Delhi High Court

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers