Supreme Court Refuses To Interfere With Denial Of Chamber Allotment To Allahabad HC Advocate Convicted For Contempt

The Supreme Court on Monday (May 19) refused to interfere with the decision of the Allahabad High Court, which held that an advocate convicted of contempt cannot be eligible for allotment of a chamber under the High Court guidelines. 

The bench of CJI BR Gavai and Justice AG Masih was hearing a plea by an advocate who was denied a chamber allotment at the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court by the Allahabad Bar Association. 

Advocate Preetika Dwivedi, counsel for the High Court, informed the bench that the petitioner was held in contempt for making serious allegations against the former CJI and 9 other judges. She further stressed that allotment of a chamber cannot be claimed by the advocates as a matter of right.

She submitted, "My lords, in a decision, have said that it's not a right to be allotted, it's a facility, in the judgment for contempt where he is convicted, he has made serious allegations against the then CJI and 9 other judges of the High Court"

She added that as per the Chamber Allotment guidelines, the advocate must not be convicted for contempt of court. It was further highlighted that the advocate did not meet the adequate number of appearances required to be qualified for chamber allotment. 

The bench was also informed that at present the High Court at Lucknow does not have any vacant chambers and 500 people are on the wait list. 

The Counsel for the petitioner, however claimed that the petitioner had appeared in nearly 1600 cases and this ground of appearance was not taken by the Association before the High Court. 

Seemingly disinclined to entertain the petition, the CJI dismissed the matter by remarking that it is not necessary for the advocate to have chamber inside the High Court and could set up one outside of the complex too. 

He said " Why do you require a chamber? You can have a chamber outside the court too." 

Before The High Court

The petitioner had filed a writ petition under Article 226 challenging the legality of Clause (4) (vii) of the Guidelines for Allotment of Advocate Chamber for new building of the Hon'ble High Court at Lucknow and also correctness of the Reject List published vide Notice dated 04.07.2023 by the Senior Registrar, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow, by which his application for allotment of Advocates Chamber was rejected. 

Notably, Clause (4)(vii) states " An Advocate against whom proceedings have been initiated and culminated into conviction under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, shall not be eligible for allotment of Chamber.”

The High Court dismissed the petition on the grounds that (1) the Advocate himself disclosed that he was convicted for contempt earlier during the application process and therefore estopped from challenging the guidelines; (2) the petition has been filed after 16 moths from the date of publication of notice for chamber vacancies which is - May 31, 2022; (3) the case of petitioner clearly falls under Clause (4)(vii) and allotment of chamber cannot be claimed as a matter of right. 

Case Details : CHANDRA BHUSHAN PANDEY Versus HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD AND ORS.SLP(C) No. 017588 - / 2024 

Click Here To Read/Download Order