Latest news with #AoRs
Economic Times
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Economic Times
SC allows Delhi govt to withdraw cases filed against Centre, LG by AAP govt on control over services, other issues
The Supreme Court has granted the Delhi government's request to withdraw cases against the Centre and the Lieutenant Governor concerning control over services and other issues. These cases included challenges to the GNCTD Amendment Act of 2023, disputes over Yamuna River rejuvenation, and disagreements regarding fund allocation for the Delhi Jal Board. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The Supreme Court on Friday allowed the Rekha Gupta-led Delhi government to withdraw cases filed against the Centre and the Lieutenant Governor (LG) over issues including the control over services by the AAP top court had in July, 2023 sought a response from the Centre on the then AAP government's plea challenging the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) (Amendment) Act, 2023 which created an authority for transfer and posting of Group-A officers in Act, initially an ordinance, had come a week after the Supreme Court handed over the control of services in Delhi excluding police, public order and land to the elected seeks to set up a National Capital Civil Service Authority for the transfer of and disciplinary proceedings against Group-A officers from the Delhi, Andaman & Nicobar, Lakshadweep, Daman and Diu and Dadra and Nagar Haveli (Civil) Services (DANICS) case that is sought to be withdrawn is against a decision of the National Green Tribunal (NGT), which was stayed in July 2023 by the top NGT order of January 19, 2023 asked the LG to head a high-level committee constituted to deal with issues concerning the rejuvenation of the Yamuna NGT constituted the high-level committee of authorities concerned in Delhi, where pollution of Yamuna was higher (about 75 per cent) when compared to the other river basin other cases that are sought to be withdrawn is the challenge to the alleged non-release of sanctioned funds for the Delhi Jal Board for the financial year 2023-2025 by the Finance Department of GNCTD, re-declaration that the LG of Delhi is bound by the aid and advice of the council of ministers of the GNCTD and directions for appointment of the chairperson of Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (DERC).The Delhi government has also sought to withdraw the challenge to orders issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and the LG with respect to release of payments to advocates appointed by the ministers without the concurrence of the LG of Delhi and the appointment of advocates on record (AoRs) and advocates in the Supreme Court and the Delhi High Court.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
13-05-2025
- Politics
- Business Standard
SC issues new rules for senior advocate designation, scraps marking system
The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday issued fresh guidelines for the process of conferring Senior Advocate designations upon lawyers. The new guidelines aim to enhance transparency and accountability in the process and replace the existing system with a more structured and democratic approach, Bar and Bench reported. A Bench comprising Justices Abhay S Oka, Ujjal Bhuyan and SVN Bhatti directed all high courts to amend their existing rules to align with the court's judgment within the next four months. This decision follows a review of the current process, which the court deemed in need of reform. End of the marking system The court also announced that it has eliminated the "marking system" currently in place for designating senior advocates. The new procedure mandates that the full court of the high courts, or the SC, will make the final decision regarding the conferment of senior advocate titles. The applications of all candidates found eligible by the Permanent Secretariat, along with their supporting documents, will be presented to the full court for review, the news report said. The top court emphasised that the process should aim for consensus, but if a consensus cannot be reached, a democratic voting method must be employed to make the final decision. Consensus or voting: High courts to decide on secret ballots The apex court further clarified that whether a secret ballot is necessary in specific cases should be left to the discretion of the individual high courts. This decision will depend on the unique facts of each case. In another ruling, the court upheld the current minimum qualification requirement of 10 years of practice for advocates applying for senior advocate designation. This threshold will remain unchanged, as per the court's ruling. The court allowed the continuation of the practice where advocates submit applications for the senior advocate designation. These applications will be considered as the advocate's consent for the designation. However, the court also indicated that the full court may confer the designation on an advocate even without an application, provided the individual meets the required criteria. No individual judge recommendations The top court ruled out the possibility of individual judges recommending candidates for senior advocate designation. This decision is part of the court's larger effort to ensure a fair and objective process. The ruling came after the court had reserved its judgment on 20 March, in a case stemming from a convict's plea for remission in a kidnapping case. During the hearing, the court raised concerns about false pleadings being signed by advocates-on-record (AoRs) and suppressed facts in appeals. The conduct of Senior Advocate Rishi Malhotra was also scrutinised during the case, leading the court to address the broader issue of the senior advocate designation process. 2017 judgment and ongoing reforms The procedure for conferring senior advocate designations was established following the Supreme Court's 2017 judgment in the case of Indira Jaising vs Supreme Court. The verdict had been issued on a plea by Senior Advocate Indira Jaising, advocating for greater transparency and objectivity in the designation process. Since then, several calls for reforms have emerged. At least four high courts have submitted suggestions for changes to the procedure. The court reiterated that the designation process should be conducted annually. However, it specified that no new designations will be initiated until the high courts frame rules in line with the new guidelines. The ongoing designation process can continue, based on the earlier decisions in the Indira Jaising case, the news report said. The top court also acknowledged that it would need to amend its own rules and guidelines in light of the latest decision, ensuring consistency across the system.
