The Delhi High Court commended a young advocate for being thoroughly prepared and arguing a case independently when his senior, representing the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) in the matter, was unavailable [All India Institute of Medical Sciences v Girdhari Lal Jakhar].

A Division Bench of Justices C Hari Shankar and Nivedita Anil Sharma also appreciated the senior counsel for letting his junior argue even after he joined the proceedings. 

"Not only did Mr Ayush Gupta argue the matter as Mr Anand Varma was on his legs elsewhere; he argued commendably, and was thoroughly conversant with the file and the record. Equally commendably, we have to note, Mr Anand Varma, when he did reach midway during arguments, did not 'take over' the case, but sat beside Mr Gupta, merely helping at times when he faltered. This is what we expect of senior as well as junior counsel," the Court observed. 

The Court said that day in and day out it sees young counsel merey seeking passover or adjournments for the arguing counsel and confessing ignorance or lack of instruction to argue the case. The present case was a welcome difference, it added.

"We see before us, day in and day out, with some dismay, young Counsel merely seeking passovers or adjournments on behalf of arguing Counsel, and confessing ignorance, or at times 'lack of instruction', if we call upon them to address arguments. This case presented a welcome difference," it remarked.

The Court added that the junior counsel should be prepared and a senior must not discourage the junior from presenting the case in all matters. 

"We record our appreciation for Mr. Gupta as well as Mr. Varma. It gives us hope," the Court further said. 

The High Court made the observation while dismissing AIIMS' challenge to a Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) order concerning the recruitment of a driver named Girdhari Lal Jakhar under the Other Backward Classes (Non-Creamy Layer) category.

Jakhar had secured fifth rank after obtaining 161 out of 200 marks in the written examination. AIIMS had rejected his candidature because his certificate was not issued during the prescribed April 2020-March 2021 period.

The High Court held that the certificate nevertheless established his OBC-NCL status for the relevant financial year and that AIIMS itself had granted him additional time to produce it.

The Court dismissed the writ petition and directed AIIMS to process Jakhar's candidature within eight weeks.

Advocates Anand Varma and Ayush Gupta appeared for AIIMS.

[Read Order]