While dismissing a petition seeking a change in the date of the preliminary examination for Delhi Higher Judicial Services, 2026, the Delhi High Court has held that certain discretion is vested with the High Court to shorten the time for completing the process before the schedule.

The High Court was considering a Petition whereby the petitioner sought an order directing the respondent to extend the time for submission of applications and conduct of the Delhi Higher Judicial Service Examination, 2026, as per the notification dated July 1, 2026, issued by the Respondent in compliance with the time schedule fixed by the Supreme Court in Malik Mazhar Sultan & Anr. V. U.P. Public Service Commission & Ors. (2006).

The Division Bench of Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora held, “From the perusal of the aforesaid paragraphs, it is clear that certain discretion is vested with the High Court to shorten the time for completing the process before the time schedule as stipulated in Malik Mazhar Sultan (3) (supra).”

“Given the facts stated by Ms. Kaul and for the reasons discussed above, it is difficult for this Court to accede to the request made by the petitioner for change of date of the preliminary examination for Delhi Higher Judicial Services, 2026”, it added.

Advocate Kamlesh Kumar Mishra represented the Petitioner while Advocate Aakanksha Kaul represented the Respondent.

Arguments

It was the petitioner’s case that as per the schedule fixed by the Supreme Court, at least two months had to be given to a candidate to prepare for an examination and hence, the examination should have been held two months after the last date of submission of the applications.

Reasoning

The Bench noted that in the case of Malik Mazhar Sultan (supra), it was observed that the High Court may amend the aforesaid schedule so as to conduct the selection process twice in a year.

The Bench took note of the fact that the High Court of Delhi amended the Rules and thereafter the present notification dated July 1, 2026 was issued wherein the schedule was fixed for conducting the examination. “We also note that the Supreme Court has clearly directed that the timelines are required to be strictly followed by High Courts while conducting the examinations”, it added.

The Bench was further informed that around 1900 candidates (approximately) have applied for the examination and they all had been issued hall tickets for the preliminary examination. “Since the candidates come from different parts of the country and the examination centres are in Delhi, it is very difficult for the respondent to change the date to a date as convenient for the petitioner. It is also her case that, no other candidates except the petitioner has sought extension of time beyond 26.07.2026”, it noted.

Thus, considering such facts and circumstances, the Bench dismissed the petition

Cause Title: Mayank Kumar Pandey v. Delhi High Court Through Registrar General (Neutral Citation: 2026:DHC:5871-DB)

Appearance

Petitioner: Advocates Kamlesh Kumar Mishra, Shivani Verma, Swagata Gupta,

Respondent: Advocate Aakanksha Kaul

Click here to read/download Order


Tags: