Supreme Court Dismisses Allegations Of Nepotism In Senior Advocate Designations

The Supreme Court on Friday firmly dismissed a petition challenging the recent designation of 70 lawyers as Senior Advocates by the Delhi High Court, rejecting allegations of nepotism in the selection process. The plea, filed by advocate Mathews Nedumpara, claimed that favoritism played a role in the appointments, pointing to familial connections between some selected lawyers and members of the judiciary.

 

A bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and K. Vinod Chandran heard the case and made it clear that the court upholds uniform standards for all lawyers, regardless of their designation. The judges asserted that claims of preferential treatment based on family ties lacked merit in a judicial setting.

 

During the hearing, the court pressed Nedumpara to provide concrete evidence to back his allegations. In response, he presented a chart listing Supreme Court judges who have relatives in the legal profession, attempting to demonstrate a pattern of bias in the selection of Senior Advocates. However, the bench was not convinced, stating that mere allegations without substantive proof could not form the basis for such a challenge.

 

The controversy had already caused friction within the selection process itself. Senior Advocate Sudhir Nandrajog, representing the Delhi government, had raised objections, claiming that the final list was approved without his consent as he was absent during a critical discussion. Despite these concerns, the Supreme Court found no solid grounds to question the integrity of the selection and dismissed the plea, reaffirming its stance on maintaining fairness in judicial appointments.

 AdvoTalks : Justice Gets Easy - YouTube