SUPREME COURT ORDERS RECONSIDERATION OF DELHI HC SENIOR DESIGNATION REJECTIONS:

On Tuesday (April 15), the Supreme Court directed the Delhi High Court to reconsider the applications for senior advocate designations that were deferred or rejected in November last year, in line with the High Court of Delhi Designations of Senior Advocates Rules, 2024.

The bench, comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, issued the direction “in the peculiar facts of the case and to prevent injustice to any of the applicants.” During the hearing, Justice Oka remarked that the records indicated the marks awarded by one member of the Permanent Committee had not been taken into account. "The issue prima facie is that marks assigned by one member have not been considered," Justice Oka said.

The bench disposed of the writ petition challenging the senior designation process, issuing specific directions for reconsideration. After reviewing the affidavit submitted by Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog and the documents provided by the Registrar General of the Delhi High Court, the Supreme Court held that the appropriate course of action would be to direct the High Court to reassess the cases of candidates whose applications were either deferred or rejected, in accordance with the High Court of Delhi Designations of Senior Advocates Rules, 2024. Accordingly, the Court directed the Registrar General to initiate the reconstitution of the Permanent Committee as per Rule 3 of the 2024 Rules. Once reconstituted, the Committee is to re-evaluate the deferred and rejected applications strictly in line with the existing rules.

During the hearing, Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, representing one of the petitioners, urged the bench to direct that the fresh evaluation process be completed within four weeks. However, the bench declined the request. Justice Abhay S. Oka noted that the process would require time to thoroughly review the judgments and documents submitted by the candidates. In response, Singh pointed out that the earlier designations in November were carried out "overnight," arguing that there was no reason the current process couldn’t also be conducted swiftly. When Singh emphasized the need to complete the designations before the Court's vacation, Justice Oka questioned, "What is the tearing hurry for the designations?" Singh alternatively suggested that the cases of deferred applicants could be considered directly by the Full Court instead of the Permanent Committee.

Senior Advocate Rajshekhar Rao, appearing on behalf of the High Court, requested the inclusion of a direction to the Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi to nominate its representatives to the Permanent Committee in accordance with the rules within one week of receiving a requisition from the Registrar General. The bench, comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, was hearing a petition challenging the Delhi High Court’s decision to designate 70 advocates as Seniors in November last year, citing alleged procedural irregularities.

In an earlier hearing, the Supreme Court had asked the Delhi High Court whether its Permanent Committee would be willing to reassess the applications that were either rejected or deferred.