JUDGMENT

VERMA, J.:— This judgment disposes of a bunch of matters comprising of some writ petitions under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India and special leave petitions under Art. 136 of the Constitution of India, all of which involve for decision certain common questions. The special leave petitions are directed against a common judgment of the Allahabad High Court dismissing some writ petitions in which the same questions were raised. In view of the decision of the High Court rejecting those contentions, the writ petitions were filed in this Court directly for the same purpose.

2. By one stroke, seemingly resorting to the Spoils System alien to our constitutional scheme, the Government of State of Uttar Pradesh has terminated by a general order the appointments of all Government Counsel (Civil, Criminal, Revenue) in all the districts of the State of U.P. w.e.f. 28-2-1990 and directed preparation of fresh panels to make appointments in place of the existing incumbents. This has been done by Circular G.0, No.D-284-Seven-Law-Ministry dated 6-21990, terminating all the existing appointments w.e.f. 28-2-1990, irrespective of the fact whether the term of the incumbent had expired or was subsisting. The validity of this State action is challenged in these matters after the challenge has been rejected by the Allahabad High Court. They have all been heard together since the common question in all of them is the validity, of the Circular G.O. No. D-25-Seven-Law-Mi,nistry dated 6-21990 issued by the Government of State of Uttar Pradesh.

3. Leave is granted in the Special Leave Petitions and the appeals are also heard on merits along with the writ petitions.

4. Broadly, two questions arise for decision by us in this bunch of matters. These are: Is the impugned circular amenable to judicial review?; and if so, is it liable to be quashed as violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India, being arbitrary?

5. The challenge in all these matters is to validity of G. O. No. D-284-Seven-Law-Ministry dated 6th February, 1990, from Shri A. K. Singh, Joint Legal Remembrancer, Justice (Law Ministry) Section, Government of Uttar Pradesh, to all the District Magistrates of Uttar Pradesh with copy to all the District Judges of the State for information and necessary action. The main question for decision in these matters being the validity of this circular, it would be appropriate to quote the same in extenso. It reads as under:

"Subject : Renewal of Tenure of All the Existing Government Counsel, Calling of new Panels for New Appointment.

I have been directed to inform you on the subject mentioned above that the Administration has taken a decision to extend the tenure of all the Government Counsel, who are presently working, till 28th February, 1990 only and to immediately receive new panels from the District Magistrates for new appointments in their places.

2.1, therefore, have been directed to state that all the Government Counsel, presently engaged for the work of Civil/Revenue/ Criminal (including Anti-Dacoity) and Urban Ceiling may be permitted to work till 28-2-1990 only and for appointments in their place, Administration may send the new 541 panels, after preparing the same in following manner:-

1. Separate single panel in each of the Civil side, Revenue side, Criminal side (including Anti-Dacoity) and Urban ceiling side fixed for 12 districts, and separate single panel in each of the courts, functioning at District and Tehsil Headquarters, may be prepared. it may be enlisted therein the names of the work zone, number of courts related to it, the number of sanctioned posts for Government Counsel and recommended names of the counsel in terms of their seniority.

2. It may be clearly mentioned in the panel which counsel belong to Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes, Backward Caste and Minority group.

3. The panels prepared for civil, revenue and urban ceiling side may contain the recommendations of names only three times of the presently sanctioned posts