The process of designating senior advocates in the Delhi high court has plunged into controversy with a key member of the permanent committee refusing to sign the final list of lawyers slated for the prestigious title claiming that the same was never finalised and sent ahead without his consent.
This unprecedented development casts a shadow over the process and the eventual notification of designations of 70 lawyers, coinciding with the impending elevation of Delhi high court chief justice Manmohan to the Supreme Court.
The controversy erupted a day after the Delhi high court reportedly cleared 70 lawyers for senior advocate designation, marking the culmination of a selection process that included interviews of 302 candidates. However, senior advocate Sudhir Nandrajog, a member of the six-member permanent committee responsible for the selection, told Hindustan Times on Saturday that he refused to sign the final list, alleging procedural lapses.
Nandrajog said he was excluded from the decision-making process, claiming the list was finalised and sent to him for a post-facto signature while he was away on arbitration duties. “The list never got finalised. For two days, I didn’t come to the high court because I was in arbitration. The list was made and sent ahead, and after that, they sent it to me for my signature. I refused to sign. The committee had to meet on Monday, but it didn’t,” he said.
In protest, Nandrajog said he had resigned from the committee, submitted his resignation to chief justice Manmohan, and also intimated the Delhi chief minister Atishi. Asked why the meeting was convened without his presence, he replied: “You can ask the chief justice; he can only answer. I can’t.”
{{/usCountry}}In protest, Nandrajog said he had resigned from the committee, submitted his resignation to chief justice Manmohan, and also intimated the Delhi chief minister Atishi. Asked why the meeting was convened without his presence, he replied: “You can ask the chief justice; he can only answer. I can’t.”
{{/usCountry}}This controversy has cast an unprecedented shadow over the designation process, raising questions about transparency and adherence to established norms. The final list of senior advocates, including 11 women and several prominent practitioners, was released on Friday following a full court meeting of all Delhi high court judges. However, the refusal of a committee member to endorse the list has now thrown its validity into question.
The permanent committee, tasked with shortlisting candidates for senior advocate designation, is chaired by chief justice Manmohan and includes justices Vibhu Bakhru and Yashwant Verma, additional solicitor general Chetan Sharma, and senior advocates Mohit Mathur and Sudhir Nandrajog.
The controversy comes as chief justice Manmohan’s name has been recommended by the Supreme Court collegium for elevation to the apex court, adding a layer of intrigue to the unfolding events. The full court meeting for the senior designation had taken place on Friday, just a day after the collegium picked justice Manmohan for the Supreme Court, highlighting the top court currently has only one judge from the Delhi high court.
The designation of senior advocates follows the Supreme Court’s 2017 judgment in Indira Jaising Vs Supreme Court of India & Ors, which laid down guidelines for a fair and transparent process. The judgment mandated the creation of permanent committees in high courts and the Supreme Court to assess candidates based on objective criteria such as integrity, legal acumen, years of practice, pro bono work, and published writings.
The Delhi high court’s committee for designation of senior advocates (CDSA or permanent committee) reportedly followed these guidelines during the recent process, conducting interviews over five days earlier this month. However, Nandrajog’s claims suggest a deviation from the principle of collective decision-making enshrined in the Indira Jaising framework. Even if the high court proceeds to notify the designations despite Nandrajog’s disclosure, the process is likely to be mired in litigation, casting a shadow over the legitimacy of the appointments.
Under the High Court of Delhi Designation of Senior Advocate Rules, 2024, the chief justice-led committee evaluates proposals for senior advocate designation based on data from the secretariat and interviews with candidates. The committee then submits its report to the full court, which makes the final decision.
The registrar general of the high court is then required to notify the designation to the secretary general of the Supreme Court, Bar Council of India, Bar Council of Delhi, registrar general of all high courts and also to all the principal district and sessions judges subordinate to the high court.