← Library
High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/1056/2018

Pawan Kumar Jha v. Lawyer'S Chambers Allotment Committee & ANR

2018-02-05Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Shakdher2 pages

$~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1056/2018 PAWAN KUMAR JHA ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Navin Kr. Jha, Advocate versus LAWYER'S CHAMBERS ALLOTMENT COMMITTEE & ANR ..... Respondent Through

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

O R D E R

% 05.02.2018 CM. APPL. 4413/2018 1.

Allowed subject to all just exceptions.

W.P.(C) 1056/2018 2.

The grievance of the petitioner is that despite his seniority and eligibility he has not been allotted a chamber by the Lawyers' Chambers Allotment Committee (hereafter referred to as "the Committee") 3.

The petitioner says that he has been one of the founding members of the Lawyers' Association at Saket and that he has been practising since 1999. The record shows that the petitioner for the first time came to grief when a provisional list was published by the Lawyers' Committee on 18.9.2017 and his name did not figure in the list.

3.1 Being aggrieved, the petitioner avers that he had made a representation to the then in-charge of the aforementioned Committee, one, Ms. Madhu Jain albeit, on 20.9.2017. 4.

The petitioner's appears to have been compounded as the list

which was published thereafter i.e., on 8.12.2017 did not once again carry his name.

5.

Counsel for the petitioner concedes that after the publication of the list on 8.12.2017, the petitioner has made no fresh representation.

6.

It is the petitioner's case that he meets the criteria fixed for allotment of a chamber and that despite having met the criteria so fixed, members of the Saket Bar Association who were admitted much later to the said association i.e., in 2013-14 have been given chambers.

7.

In these circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the Lawyers' Chamber Allotment Committee i.e., respondent No. 1 to treat the present writ petition as a representation and dispose of the same with the reasoned order. 8.

The petitioner will be called for a hearing and thereafter an order would be passed. Needless to say the petitioner will have the liberty to assail the order passed by the Committee i.e, respondent No. 1 if his grievance remains unadressed. The needful will be done by the committee, respondent No. 1 as expeditiously as possible though not later than 6 weeks from today. 9.

Dasti.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J FEBRUARY 05, 2018/hs/Nk