Nepotism in judiciary? Lawyers allege breach of Articles 14, 21

Alleging entrenched nepotism and discriminatory rules within the judicial system, the First Generation Lawyers’ Association (FGLA) has moved the Delhi High Court, challenging both the allotment of lawyers’ chambers in the High Court and the Union Government’s recent empanelment of government counsel for the Supreme Court. The PIL, filed under Article 226, is scheduled for hearing tomorrow.

On the issue of chamber allotment, the FGLA says the current rules, framed in 1980, are “arbitrary and discriminatory” and violate Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. Young, first-generation lawyers often wait for years for chambers, which are essential for drafting, client meetings, case preparation and storing files.

The petition states that “a large number of advocates struggle without any functional workspace within the court premises…deserving advocates remain on waiting lists for years with no transparency or indication of when their turn will come.”

The association cites Rule 5-A, which gives preferential treatment to spouses, sons and daughters of the existing allottees. The FGLA argues that this creates a hereditary system.

“As per Rule 5 of the Delhi High Court Chamber Allocation Rules, in case of demise or leaving practice by an advocate, the chamber allocated to him will automatically be allotted to his/her spouse or children, which is contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution of India,” said Rudra Vikram Singh, president, First Generation Lawyers’ Association.

“Hence, the FGLA, which represents first-generation advocates across the country, has challenged this arbitrary rule of chamber allocation,” said Singh.

The PIL seeks to strike down these provisions and requests the court to set up an independent committee to review all chamber allocations, cancel unused or misused chambers and re-allocate them fairly.

The FGLA has also challenged the recent empanelment of over 650 lawyers as government counsel by the Ministry of Law & Justice.

The petition raises concerns that “the list includes numerous advocates who were enrolled only in 2024 and even 2025, and in some cases individuals who may not have cleared the All-India Bar Examination (AIBE), thereby raising serious doubts about the criteria, objectivity and legality of the selection exercise.”

Advocate Singh said, “It is really shocking to know that the Union of India has empanelled advocates who just got enrolled in 2025 to represent the Government of India in the apex court. These advocates are not even technically qualified to appear before courts as some of them have not cleared the AIBE exam, which is mandatory to become an advocate.”

The petition states that the notification does not disclose eligibility criteria or evaluation methods and that many experienced lawyers were excluded while junior lawyers with minimal practice were placed in top categories.

The FGLA says the aim of the petition is to ensure transparency. “The purpose of this PIL is…to seek judicial intervention to ensure that transparent criteria for empanelment are published and the process is free of arbitrariness,” the petition states.