The High Court issued notice to the Centre and Mr Pandit after taking note of a Supreme Court order directing it to expeditiously decide the plea challenging his appointment. File. | Photo Credit: Sushil Kumar Verma The Delhi High Court on Thursday (March 19, 2026) issued notice on a plea filed by a body of patent officers seeking removal of the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (CGPDTM), Prof. Unnat P. Pandit, who heads the intellectual property rights administration in India. The High Court issued notice to the Centre and Mr Pandit after taking note of a Supreme Court order directing it to expeditiously decide the plea challenging his appointment. The High Court has listed the matter for further hearing in May. The petition has been filed by the All India Patent Officers’ Welfare Association (AIPOWA) alleging that Mr Pandit’s appointment was “illegal and arbitrary” and made in violation of prescribed eligibility criteria. appeared for the petitioner association. According to the petitioner, represented by Advocate Gyanant Kumar Singh, the appointment process allegedly deviated from government norms, including the requirement of an open advertisement as mandated under a Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) Office Memorandum. The petition further claims that Mr Pandit lacked the requisite experience and did not possess the mandatory five years of Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs)/Annual Performance Appraisal Reports (APARs) required for deputation appointments. It also alleges irregularities in the selection process, including a change in the composition of the Search Committee after its first meeting and the decision to proceed without issuing a fresh advertisement. Additionally, the plea contends that the appointment was made for a five-year term in violation of DoPT norms which prescribe an initial tenure of three years, extendable by two more years. The association has argued that the process denied eligible candidates an opportunity to apply after the government allegedly moved away from the Central Staffing Scheme route and opted for a Search Committee mechanism. Published – March 20, 2026 02:47 am IST Share this: Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook Click to share on Threads (Opens in new window) Threads Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email More Click to print (Opens in new window) Print Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Tumblr Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window) Pocket Click to share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon Click to share on Nextdoor (Opens in new window) Nextdoor Click to share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky Like this:Like Loading... Post navigation Collective of Tamil Creators, Readers, and Social Activists demands withdrawal of Jnanpith Award to Vairamuthu Excise policy case: HC gives more time to Kejriwal, others to reply