PIL In Allahabad High Court Challenges Recent Appointments Of State Law Officers

A public interest litigation has been filed before the Allahabad High Court challenging the recent appointments of Chief Standing Counsels and Additional Government Advocates.

The matter was argued before a bench of Chief Justice Pritinker Diwaker and Justice Ashutosh Srivastava, which has directed the parties to supply a synopsis of their arguments.

Petitioners who are enrolled with the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh have filed the PIL challenging the recent appointments made by the State Government on its panel on the grounds that due procedure was not followed by the State while appointing these advocates. Further, it has been alleged that the advocates so appointed lack ‘competence’.

Additional Advocate General Manish Goyal appearing for the State submitted that all appointments were made in accordance with law. A committee headed by the Advocate General had made the appointments after thorough scrutiny of the candidates, he submitted. Raising a question as to the competence of those appointed, by way of PIL, would be damaging the dignity of those lawyers, he added.

AAG Goyal also raised the issue of maintainability of the PIL stating the petitioner had nowhere in his petition mentioned that he was agitating the cause of his/her fellow advocates. “It appears to be a set up petition by those who haven’t been given appointments,” argued the AAG.

Petitioners on the other hand stated that the pendency of cases in the High Court is due to the incompetence of the lawyers of the panel of the State Government.

AAG vehemently opposed this submission, stating pendency is not due to the lawyers; lawyers assist Court based on the instructions they receive from their clients (in this case various State Departments). "Every lawyer is incompetent till material is supplied upon him to put forth his case," AAG said.

He further argued that no other panel has been targeted or impleaded or shown to have followed or flouted the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court for appointment of lawyers to panels.

Case Title: Sunita Sharma and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others [WPIL No. 1578/2023]