Read Time: 03 minutes

Synopsis

A Bench of CJI U.U. Lalit and Justice Bela M. Trivedi, while hearing a petition, where the petitioner appearing in person was an Advocate, challenging the appointed committee and the appointment of of 55 advocates as Senior Advocates out of the total 237 applicants, dismissed the same on finding no grounds to interfere.

The preferred writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution, was filed by Advocate Harvinder Chowdhury. The advocate alleged that the committee of 2 judges that had interviewed the candidates for the appointment, did not do so in the manner otherwise required. 

In the initial submissions, CJI furiously asked the advocate, to stick to the submissions only and not revolve around in ambiguity. Court further said, "We don't want anything else, please tell us where the High Court procedure has gone wrong?". 

She further submitted that the many judgments are not reported (reportable), and if they do, they only mention Senior Counsels' name, where she had fallen. And that when a list is prepared in he registry, the process lapses there. 

The petition challenged on the grounds:

1. that the documents she appended to her candidature, did make out that she is suitable. Which the Committee did not even consider.

2.that the Committee was not properly constituted.

3.that the 2 judges, who conducted the interview, asked 1-2 questions only, and did the interview of the candidates in a hurried manner.

After the Court dismissed the petition, advocate said, "I am so grateful, It doesn't not matter whether I become or not, I am proud that I appeared".

Case Title: Harvinder Chowdhury vs Supreme Court of India and Ors.