V.P.GOPALAN NAMBIYAR, K.K.NARENDRAN
PADMANABHAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
1. The petitioner seeks a writ of quo-warranto, challenging the appointment of an Additional Advocate-General for this State, for a term of three years from 1st January 1976, by Ext. P1 order dated 26121975. By Ext. P2 order of the same date, the term of office of the present incumbent as the Advocate-General of the State was extended for a further period of three years, from 1st January, 1976. Both the appointments were under Art.165 (1) of the Constitution of India. It is not for us to concern ourselves with the policy underlying these appointments or even with the propriety of duplicating the office of Advocate-General. A writ of quo-warranto having been sought for, we propose to address ourselves only to the question whether the 2nd respondent has title to the office of the Additional Advocate-General or is a usurper of the said office.
2. The writ petition was admitted by a learned judge on 29 31976 and notice was ordered to the respondents. On the same date on which notice was ordered, and before the same had been served on the other side, the learned judge recorded his view that in view of the importance of the question involved, the petition should be heard by a
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.