38.6c New Delhi, India, Thursday, February 12, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Delhi High Court Removes Requirement Of Joint Proposal By Senior Advocates For Senior Designation [Read Notice]

By LawStreet News Network      20 August, 2019 04:08 PM      0 Comments
Delhi High Court Removes Requirement Of Joint Proposal By Senior Advocates For Senior Designation [Read Notice]

The Full Court of the Delhi High Court on August 1, 2019, has taken a decision to remove the pre-requisite of joint proposal by three senior advocates for a lawyer to apply for Senior designation.

A Public Notice subsequently published to this effect on August 14, 2019, calls for all eligible and desirous advocates to apply for the said position to the Secretariat of the Committee by 4.30 PM on August 31, 2019.

It also clarifies that the Advocates who have already applied with the recommendation of three Senior Advocates need not apply again.

Earlier, a Division Bench comprising of former Chief Justice Rajendra Menon and JusticeAnup J. Bhambhani had stayed the operation of Rule 7 of the High Court of Delhi Designation of Senior Advocate Rules 2018, insofar as it called for a joint proposal by three Senior Advocates for a lawyer to apply for Senior designation. The order was passed on a petition filed by advocates Nandita Rao and Farrukh Rasheed challenging the requirement of a joint proposal for the Senior gown.

The Petitioners had contended that "the said entry barrier to apply for senior designation is in violation of provisions of Section 16(2) of the Advocates Act and also of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution and further it is in violation of judgment of Supreme Court in case titled Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India.

As per the Public Notice, Rule 7 of the High Court of Delhi Designation of Senior Advocate Rules 2018shall now read as under:

"(7) Procedure for designation of an Advocate as Senior Advocate. An advocate may be considered by the High Court for being designated as Senior Advocate either (A) SuoMotu by the High Court. or (B) on an application by an Advocate.

  • Procedure Suo Motu:
  1. An Advocate who fulfils the eligibility conditions prescribed hereinbefore, may be considered suo moto by the High Court for being designated as a Senior Advocate either on the written proposal of a Judge of the High Court or of Hon'ble the Chief Justice of the High Court. 
  2.  Such written proposal of a Judge or of Hon'ble the Chief Justice shall be sent to the Registrar General who shall forward it to the Secretariat after obtaining a consent-cum personal information sheet (Annexure-A to these Rules) duly filled in and signed by the Advocate concerned.

7(B) Procedure on application by an Advocate:

Any Advocate who fulfils the eligibility conditions prescribed hereinbefore may submit a written application for being designated as Senior Advocate to the Registrar General who shall forward it to the Secretariat after obtaining a consent-cum-personal information sheet (Annexure-A to these Rules) duly filled in and signed by the Advocate concerned."

[Read Notice]



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

gauhati-hc-quashes-case-against-influencer-who-claimed-assamese-women-practise-black-magic-and-convert-men-into-animals
Trending Judiciary
Gauhati HC Quashes Case Against Influencer Who Claimed Assamese Women Practise Black Magic and Convert Men Into Animals [Read Order]

Gauhati High Court quashes case against influencer Abhishek Kar over remarks on black magic in Assam, holds offences under BNS, IT Act not made out.

11 February, 2026 03:08 PM
high-courts-cannot-nullify-arbitration-proceedings-while-substituting-arbitrators-sc
Trending Judiciary
High Courts Cannot Nullify Arbitration Proceedings While Substituting Arbitrators: SC [Read Order]

Supreme Court rules High Courts cannot nullify arbitration proceedings while appointing substitute arbitrators under Section 15(2) of the Arbitration Act.

11 February, 2026 03:58 PM

TOP STORIES

resignation-on-medical-grounds-attracts-forfeiture-of-pension-service-madras-hc-full-bench
Trending Judiciary
Resignation on Medical Grounds Attracts Forfeiture of Pension Service: Madras HC Full Bench [Read Order]

Madras High Court Full Bench rules resignation on medical grounds leads to forfeiture of past service under Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978.

09 February, 2026 12:16 PM
madras-hc-clarifies-section-37-of-ndps-act-not-applicable-to-acceptance-of-bond-for-appearance
Trending Judiciary
Madras HC Clarifies: Section 37 of NDPS Act Not Applicable to Acceptance of Bond for Appearance [Read Order]

Madras High Court says Section 37 NDPS Act doesn’t apply to acceptance of bond for appearance on summons, as it is distinct from grant of bail.

09 February, 2026 12:20 PM
sc-refers-matter-to-larger-bench-to-resolve-conflicting-judgments-on-third-partys-right-under-under-order-ix-rule-13-cpc
Trending Judiciary
SC Refers Matter To Larger Bench To Resolve Conflicting Judgments On Third Party’s Right Under Under Order IX Rule 13 CPC [Read Order]

Supreme Court refers the issue of third party rights under Order IX Rule 13 CPC to a larger bench to resolve conflicting judgments on ex parte decrees.

09 February, 2026 12:35 PM
bombay-sessions-court-grants-bail-in-193-crore-cyber-fraud-case-reaffirms-bail-is-rule-jail-is-exception
Trending Judiciary
Bombay Sessions Court Grants Bail in ₹1.93 Crore Cyber Fraud Case, Reaffirms ‘Bail Is Rule, Jail Is Exception’ [Read Order]

Bombay Sessions Court grants bail in ₹1.93 crore cyber fraud case, citing right to liberty as investigation is complete and accused not direct beneficiary.

09 February, 2026 04:17 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email