Top court wants fresh review of senior advocates names of Delhi HC

The Supreme Court has called for a fresh review of senior advocate designations by the Delhi high court, considering rejected and deferred candidates.

The Supreme Court on Friday said the controversy surrounding the designation of senior advocates by the Delhi high court required a “de novo” — or fresh — consideration of candidates who were either rejected or deferred. It recommended that this process be carried out by a reconstituted committee and sought the high court’s view on the suggestion by April 15.

The matter arose from a petition filed by Raman Gandhi, challenging the high court’s November 2023 list naming 70 new senior advocates. (HT ARCHIVE)

The matter arose from a petition filed by Raman Gandhi, challenging the high court’s November 2023 list naming 70 new senior advocates. A bench comprising justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan observed, “To put the controversy to rest, this is the best solution. A fresh process is to be conducted by reconstituting the committee.”

The bench had earlier asked whether the full court of the Delhi high court would reconsider rejected candidates. On Friday, senior advocate Rajshekhar Rao, representing the high court along with advocate Sharmila Upadhyay, said: “The high court will consider the remaining candidates in full court and decide in accordance with what the court has observed.”

Of the 302 candidates interviewed, 67 were deferred and around 160 were rejected. Rao said 299 candidates received marks, one was deferred, and two were ineligible due to age -- they were below 40 years.

The evaluation was conducted by a six-member permanent committee headed by then chief justice Manmohan, along with justices Vibhu Bakhru and Yashwant Varma, senior advocate Sudhir Nandrajog (nominated by the then AAP government), additional solicitor general Chetan Sharma (as Delhi has no advocate general), and senior advocate Mohit Mathur, then president of the Delhi High Court Bar Association.

Nandrajog resigned shortly after the list’s publication on 29 November 2023, alleging that he was not consulted on the final list.

If a new committee is formed, its composition will differ significantly. The then chief justice is now a judge of the Supreme Court, justice Varma is facing an in-house inquiry over a large sum of cash allegedly found at his residence and is being transferred to the Allahabad high court, the political leadership in Delhi has changed, and the bar association has elected a new president.

Petitioner Gandhi alleged the process was flawed, claiming some ineligible candidates made the list and Nandrajog did not award marks.

The court asked whether a fresh review could be limited to the rejected and deferred candidates. However, another petitioner, Saurabh Anand Prakash, opposed this, saying, “If a de novo exercise is to be there, then the entire 302 applicants must undergo vetting.”

The matter will be heard again on 15 April.