"World Should Become Senior But Not You": CJI Slams Lawyer Seeking Senior Designation, Calls Petition Frivolous

The Supreme Court today came down heavily on a petitioner appearing in person before it in a plea seeking conferment of Senior Designation.

At the outset a miffed CJI Surya Kant told Advocate Sanjay Dubey, "The whole world should become a senior but not you..if the High Court grants you a senior designation we will set it aside.."

Dubey informed court that the High Court had failed to comply with the Supreme Court's earlier direction to reconsider the deferred or rejected applications expeditiously.

"What is the purpose of filing this frivolous petition..there are already parasites in the society and you want to join hands with them.", CJI said. Adding to the sentiment, Justice Bagchi, also on the bench said, "You have no other litigation to pursue other than this.."

Notably, CJI Kant went on to address the growing trend of lawyers becoming activists to attack the institutions. "There are youngsters who do not get any employment, who do not have any place in the profession, they become social media, they become RTI activist and they start attacking everyone...", the CJI added.

Justice Bagchi tried to reason out with the petitioner in person and told him that senior advocate designation is something that is conferred on an advocate and not pursued by them.

Last year too, the Supreme Court had refused to entertain a petition filed by Dubey challenging the designation of 70 advocates as Senior Advocates by the Delhi High Court. 

On November 29, 2024, the Delhi High Court’s Full Court conferred Senior Advocate status on 70 lawyers after interviewing 302 candidates. The senior designation was conferred by a permanent committee comprising Chief Justice Manmohan, the next two senior most judges of the High Court, Vibhu Bakhru and Yashwant Varma, Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma and senior advocates Sudhir Nandrajog and Mohit Mathur evaluated the candidates. High Court's decision had been under the spotlight since one of the members of the Permanent Committee resigned over claims that the final list was prepared without his consent.

Allegedly, Senior Advocate Nandrajog had not signed on the final list, which was circulated to the full court for deliberation, as he was busy in arbitration for two days. Furthermore, the controversy centred on claims that the final list that was presented for the full court’s approval had been altered, deviating from the original list that the committee had intended. It was also being suggested that the original list, which was more thoroughly vetted and approved by the Permanent Committee, was tampered with or modified before it reached the full court for consideration.

Case Title: SANJAY DUBEY Vs REGISTRAR GENERAL HIGH COURT OF DELHI

Bench: CJI Kant and Justice Bagchi

Hearing Date: May 15, 2026