The consultation with the High Court is mandatory for the appointment of Public Prosecutors and Additional Public Prosecutors, and the views of the High Court on the professional competency of the candidates are crucial.

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. This pronouncement has been done through hybrid mode.

2. In the present petition, the role of the High Court in the appointment of Additional Public Prosecutors (hereinafter, `APP/APPs') under Section 24(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter, `CrPC') has been called in question.

3. The Petitioner-Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, an Advocate enrolled since 1998, has filed the present petition, seeking directions to place his candidature before the Full Court, and approval of his empanelment/nomination as an APP.

Background

4. The Respondent No.1-GNCTD issued an advertisement for recruitment of Standing Counsel Criminal, Additional Standing Counsel Criminal, and APP in the year 2014-15. The Petitioner had applied for the post of APP, however, his application remained pending. According to the Petitioner, his name has been put on hold for the post of the APP since 2014/2015.

5. In 2022, the GNCTD again called for applications for the post of APPs. The Petitioner had submitted a fresh application. A Committee constituted by the GNCTD had cleared his name, and forwarded a proposal for appointment of 44 lawyers as APPs to the High Court of Delhi.

6. The proposal forwarded by the GNCTD was placed before the Full Court on 4th April 2022. In June 2022, the Petitioner states that he was informed that except four candidates, all other names had been approved by the High Court, and his candidature was deferred without providing any reasons. He thereafter filed a written representation on 11th July 2022 addressed to Hon'ble The Chief Justice of the High Court, which according to him was not duly considered. The prayer in the writ petition is as under:

"a). Issue a writ, order or directions in the nature of certiorari/mandamus or any other appropriate writ to the respondent no.3, Registrar of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi for placing/consideration of the name of the Petitioner/Advocate before the Full Court of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, as recommended by the Government of NCT of Delhi and approved by the Hon'ble Lieutenant Governor for empanelment/nomination as the APP and send it for the notification with the others name to the Government of NCT of Delhi.

b). Issue a writ, order or directions in the nature of certiorari/mandamus or any other appropriate writ to the Respondent no.3, Registrar of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi for placing/consideration of the name of the Petitioner/Advocate writ petition as a representation before the Full Court of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in its next meeting or as soon as possible, as recommended by the Government of NCT of Delhi and approved by the Hon'ble Lieutenant Governor for empanelment/nomination as the APP and send it for the notification with the others name to the Government of NCT of Delhi if passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi accordingly prayed for.

c). Issue a writ, order or directions in the nature of certiorari/mandamus or any other appropriate writ to the Respondent no. 1 and 2 to release fees as given to others counsels/APP's, from the year 2014/15 till 2022 as applicable in the case of the petitioner accordingly to meet out the justice.

d). Issue a writ/notice order or directions in the or nature any of certiorari/mandamus other appropriate writ to the respondents to file their counter/reply before this Hon'ble Court in the above said case.

e). Issue a writ/notice order or directions in the nature of certiorari/mandamus or any other appropriate writ direction to the Respondent no.1 and 2 not to fill the vacant seat of the APP at least keep one seat vacant for the petitioner, till the pending of this writ petition before this Hon'ble Court.

f). Pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."

Submissions

7. The Petitioner, appearing in person, submits on the strength of the judgment rendered in the State of Punjab v. Brijeshwar Singh Chahal, [(2016) 6 SCC 1], that the en