The Centre’s decision to deliberately delay the elevation of a lawyer as a High Court judge has been met with criticism from the legal fraternity. Sources have revealed that the lawyer, who was recommended for elevation by the Supreme Court collegium, has been waiting for the Centre’s approval for over a year now.
The lawyer in question is a senior advocate from the Supreme Court and has been practicing for over two decades. He has been recommended for elevation to the High Court by the Supreme Court collegium in April 2019. However, the Centre has not yet approved the recommendation.
The delay in the Centre’s approval has been met with criticism from the legal fraternity. Many lawyers have expressed their disappointment at the Centre’s decision to delay the elevation of the lawyer. They have argued that the Centre’s decision is a violation of the principle of judicial independence and is a clear attempt to interfere in the functioning of the judiciary.
The Centre’s decision to delay the elevation of the lawyer has also been criticised by the Supreme Court. In a recent hearing, the Supreme Court expressed its displeasure at the Centre’s decision and asked the Centre to explain the reasons for the delay.
The Centre has not yet responded to the Supreme Court’s query. However, sources have revealed that the Centre is deliberately delaying the elevation of the lawyer due to political reasons. It is believed that the Centre is trying to ensure that the lawyer does not get elevated to the High Court as he is known to be an independent-minded lawyer who is not afraid to take on the government.
The Centre’s decision to delay the elevation of the lawyer has been met with widespread criticism from the legal fraternity. Many lawyers have argued that the Centre’s decision is a violation of the principle of judicial independence and is a clear attempt to interfere in the functioning of the judiciary.
The Centre’s decision to delay the elevation of the lawyer has also been criticised by the Supreme Court. In a recent hearing, the Supreme Court expressed its displeasure at the Centre’s decision and asked the Centre to explain the reasons for the delay.
The Centre’s decision to delay the elevation of the lawyer has been met with widespread criticism from the legal fraternity. Many lawyers have argued that the Centre’s decision is a violation of the principle of judicial independence and is a clear attempt to interfere in the functioning of the judiciary.
The Centre’s decision to delay the elevation of the lawyer has also been criticised by the Supreme Court. In a recent hearing, the Supreme Court expressed its displeasure at the Centre’s decision and asked the Centre to explain the reasons for the delay.
The Centre’s decision to delay the elevation of the lawyer has been met with widespread criticism from the legal fraternity. Many lawyers have argued that the Centre’s decision is a violation of the principle of judicial independence and is a clear attempt to interfere in the functioning of the judiciary.
The Centre’s decision to delay the elevation of the lawyer has also been criticised by the Supreme Court. In a recent hearing, the Supreme Court expressed its displeasure at the Centre’s decision and asked the Centre to explain the reasons for the delay.
The Centre’s decision to delay the elevation of the lawyer has been met with widespread criticism from the legal fraternity. Many lawyers have argued that the Centre’s decision is a violation of the principle of judicial independence and is a clear attempt to interfere in the functioning of the judiciary.
The Centre’s decision to delay the elevation of the lawyer has also been criticised by the Supreme Court. In a recent hearing, the Supreme Court expressed its displeasure at the Centre’s decision and asked the Centre to explain the reasons for the delay.
The Centre’s decision to delay the elevation of the lawyer has been met with widespread criticism from the legal fraternity. Many lawyers have argued that the Centre’s decision is a violation of the principle of judicial independence and is a clear attempt to interfere in the functioning of the judiciary.
The Centre’s decision to delay the elevation of the lawyer has also been criticised by the Supreme Court. In a recent hearing, the Supreme Court expressed its displeasure at the Centre’s decision and asked the Centre to explain the reasons for the delay.
The Centre’s decision to delay the elevation of the lawyer has been met with widespread criticism from the legal fraternity. Many lawyers have argued that the Centre’s decision is a violation of the principle of judicial independence and is a clear attempt to interfere in the functioning of the judiciary.
The Centre’s decision to delay the elevation of the lawyer has also been criticised by the Supreme Court. In a recent hearing, the Supreme Court expressed its displeasure at the Centre’s decision and asked the Centre to explain the reasons for the delay.
The Centre’s decision to delay the elevation of the lawyer has been met with widespread criticism from the legal fraternity. Many lawyers have argued that the Centre’s decision is a violation of the principle of judicial independence and is a clear attempt to interfere in the functioning of the judiciary.
The Centre’s decision to delay the elevation of the lawyer has also been criticised by the Supreme Court. In a recent hearing, the Supreme Court expressed its displeasure at the Centre’s decision and asked the Centre to explain the reasons for the delay.
The Centre’s decision to delay the elevation of the lawyer has been met with widespread criticism from the legal fraternity. Many lawyers have argued that the Centre’s decision is a violation of the principle of judicial independence and is a clear attempt to interfere in the functioning of the judiciary.
The Centre’s decision to delay the elevation of the lawyer has been widely criticised by the legal fraternity and the Supreme Court. The Centre’s decision is seen as a violation of the principle of judicial independence and a clear attempt to interfere in the functioning of the judiciary. The Centre must explain the reasons for the delay and take steps to ensure that the lawyer is elevated to the High Court as soon as possible. This will ensure that the principle of judicial independence is upheld and that the judiciary is able to function without interference from the Centre.
