Delhi High Court designates 85 senior advocates after Supreme Court intervention

The Delhi High Court, in a full court meeting on Thursday evening, approved the designation of 85 advocates as senior advocates, with dissent recorded over one of the 86 names placed before it, according to sources.

Among those designated senior are ED special counsel Zoheb Hossain, former ED special counsel Nitesh Rana, Delhi government's standing counsel on the criminal side Sanjay Lao, additional standing counsel on civil side Satyakam, and special public prosecutor Amit Prasad, who represented the Delhi police in the 2020 northeast Delhi riot cases. Ten women, including Manali Singhal, have also been designated seniors.

This round of designations follows a Supreme Court direction to reconsider candidates who were deferred or rejected in the controversial 2024 process. Unlike the previous round, this time the committee conducted rigorous one-on-one interviews, which several candidates described as “a pleasant change” and a sharp departure from earlier practices.

The committee comprised Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya as chairperson, the two senior-most judges—Justices V Kameswar Rao and Nitin Wasudeo Sambre—Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA) president N Hariharan, and senior advocate and former Additional Solicitor General Sanjay Jain.

The 85 fresh designations add to the list of 70 senior advocates designated in 2024, a process that was challenged in the Supreme Court. In November 2024, the High Court's Committee for Designation of Senior Advocates deferred a decision on 67 of the 302 applicants, designated 70, and rejected the remaining 165.

Controversy erupted when senior advocate Sudhir Nandrajog, one of the six members of the Permanent Committee, resigned, writing to then Chief Justice Manmohan and the Delhi government that the final list had been drawn up without his assent. The designations were made on the eve of Justice Manmohan's elevation to the Supreme Court.

A petition was subsequently moved before the Supreme Court seeking to quash the November 2024 decision. On April 15, 2025, the Supreme Court directed the Delhi High Court to consider the cases of deferred and rejected candidates in accordance with the High Court of Delhi Designation of Senior Advocates Rules, 2024.

“The issue prima facie is that marks assigned by one member (of the Permanent Committee) have not been considered,” Justice Abhay Oka, then hearing the petition, had said. The court also directed reconstitution of the Permanent Committee under the rules, ordering that the deferred and rejected applications be placed before it afresh.

The reconstituted Permanent Committee considered the applications of 232 advocates who were deferred or rejected in 2024 and conducted interviews that were markedly different in character. Advocates who appeared before the committee said each candidate was interviewed one-on-one for between five and 15 minutes, with 10–20 candidates slotted per day. The interview process began on April 28, and questions ranged from basic principles of law to procedural questions requiring logical thinking.

“The interviews were interactive, with questions being asked on principles of law. It is a first, and it is a welcome change… It also helps the judges know what kind of people they are designating,” an advocate who appeared before the committee in April said.

In contrast, in 2024, advocates said that groups of 10 or more would be called into the room and interviews lasted about five minutes collectively for the entire group. The 2024 committee had scheduled interviews for 303 candidates over five days.