The Delhi High Court declined to entertain a PIL challenging differing dress codes for judicial and technical members of the GST Appellate Tribunal. The Bench said, “How is this a PIL? These issues are not justiciable,” refusing to examine the matter.
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court declined to entertain a public interest litigation filed by a lawyer challenging differing dress codes for judicial and technical members of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT).
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia observed that the matter was not one for the courts to decide.
The Court said,
“How is this a PIL? These issues are not justiciable,”
ALSO READ: Delhi High Court Mandates Gowns for Advocates || New Dress Code from November 4
The petition challenged a June 2025 office order issued by the President of GSTAT, which prescribes distinct attire for the president and judicial members versus technical members. The order requires the president and judicial members to wear the same dress as prescribed for Supreme Court or High Court judges (without gowns). Technical members, by contrast, are directed to wear white, striped or black trousers, a black coat, white shirt and neckties.
The Court suggested the petitioner seek redressal from the tribunal’s president.
The High Court remarked,
“Judicial members of the tribunal are generally Supreme Court or High Court judges. A non-judicial cannot be permitted to wear robes or band. That could be the reason. You want non-judicial persons to also adorn robes? Represent your case to the President of tribunal,”
ALSO READ: Kerala High Court Modifies Dress Code for Women Judicial Officers
Counsel for the petitioner argued the different dress codes were visually jarring and discriminatory.
The lawyer submitted,
“President and members have a dress code separate to the technical members which is creating a disparity in dress code. The judicial member will sit like a judge while the technical member shall have the dress of a court master. Discussions are rife if they have any power. It is creating an eye-sore. In no tribunal of the country there are different dresses. It is discrimination,”
The Court recorded the submission and allowed the petitioner to approach the GSTAT president.
The Court directed,
“In our opinion can better be decided by the President. Accordingly, we permit the petitioner to approach the President for ventilation of her grievance. If representation made, we request the Hon’ble President on GSTAT to consider the same and take appropriate decision, if possible, with expedition,”
Case Title: Garima Singh & Ors vs Union of India & Anr.