The Delhi High Court on Monday stayed a recruitment advertisement by the Directorate of Prosecution that invited applications from retired prosecutors for 196 vacancies. Justice Sachin Datta, observing that it was “unfortunate” that young lawyers were being deprived of the opportunity, directed that the advertisement be kept in abeyance until a decision is made on a representation filed by the petitioner.
Background of the Case
The matter came before the court through a writ petition filed by advocate Vikas Verma, challenging an advertisement issued by the Directorate of Prosecution on August 22. The advertisement sought to engage retired prosecutors as public prosecutors on a contractual basis to fill 196 vacancies. According to the terms, the selected candidates would be assigned duties normally handled by public, additional, and assistant public prosecutors, including appearances in sessions courts and special courts. It also stipulated that in “special cases,” appointees could be assigned to any department of the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi.
Arguments of the Parties
Appearing for the petitioner, Senior Advocate Mohit Mathur submitted that the advertisement effectively bypasses reservation policies for marginalised classes, to which Mr. Verma belongs. He argued that reserving such posts exclusively for retirees “shatters the dreams” of thousands of young, eligible lawyers who aspire to hold these positions.
The Delhi government countered these submissions, stating that the contractual appointments were intended as an “interim measure” to address the existing shortage of prosecutors in the city.
Court’s Observations and Decision
Justice Sachin Datta remarked that the move to exclude young advocates was “not acceptable.” Addressing the state authorities, Justice Datta orally observed, “You want to deprive young advocates of this opportunity and appoint retired prosecutors. You ask your chief secretary to resolve this matter positively.”
The Court issued notice and sought responses from the Director of Prosecution, Delhi’s Chief Secretary, the Principal Secretary (Home), and the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) within two weeks.
In its order, the High Court directed the Principal Secretary (Home) of the Delhi government “to decide the representation” submitted by Mr. Verma. The court explicitly ordered that until the representation is decided by a reasoned order, “the advertisement shall be kept in abeyance.”
