The Delhi High Court recently agreed with the decision passed by the Lawyers’ Chamber Allotment Committee (CAC) of the Saket District Courts, directing an advocate to vacate the chamber illegally sublet to her by the original allotees [Anju Tanwar Vs Lawyers Chambers Allotment Committee & Ors.].
The chamber was originally allotted to advocates Rabinder Mohanty and Rajesh Nayan. The petitioner, advocate Anju Tanwar, told the Court that the original allottees had illegally sublet the chamber to her.
Tanwar stated that she has paid about ₹20 lakh between 2017 and 2025 in the form of rental amount, deposit and renovations.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav observed that Tanwar was an associate of the original allottee Rajesh Nayan and was merely a “permissive user” of the chamber, with no vested right to use it.
“It appears from the record that the petitioner was allowed to use the aforesaid Chamber as an associate of Mr Rajesh Nayan. The CAC, therefore, rightly concluded that the petitioner was merely a permissive user of the Chamber. The Court further concurs with the view taken by the CAC that in the absence of there being any policy/rule/regulation entitling the petitioner, there is no vested right in favour of the petitioner to use the chamber," the Court said.
Tanwar had approached the High Court for cancellation of the chamber allotment to the original allottees. She also sought to set aside the CAC order asking her to vacate.
The Court specifically observed that the original allottees were not empowered to sublet the chamber.
Therefore, it allowed Tanwar to approach an appropriate court to seek redressal and recovery of the amount paid towards rent and other expenses.
Further, with respect to Tanwar’s prayer seeking cancellation of the original allotment, the Court directed the CAC to look into allegations of violations of terms and conditions on the part of original allottees of the chamber and also directed it to take necessary action.
Tanwar appeared in person along with advocate Nitesh Mehra.
[Read order]