Back
2019 Supreme(All) 1714
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
PRADEEP KUMAR SINGH BAGHEL, PANKAJ BHATIA, JJ.
Santosh Kumar Pandey - Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. and Others - Respondents
Writ - C No. 4794 of 2019
Decided On : 07-05-2019
For the Appellant : Achyut Jee
Headnote:
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 24(4), (5),(6) – Writ petition filed in Court State Government appoints Government Counsel or refuses to renew their tenure and proposes new panel in districts or after change of Government, in spite of the fact that Supreme Court in unbroken line of decisions has settled law in respect of appointment, termination and renewal of tenure of Government Counsel, litigation unabated –Held, if State Government feels that process of finaling names cannot completed or concluded, nothing on record in present case to establish as to what objective satisfaction was recorded either by Hon'ble Minister, or Chief Secretary Under Secretary or District Magistrate while recommending, testing the appointments only on ground of decision making process, no hesitation in holding that the appointments made vide order are liable to quashed as being wholly, for period of four months, State Government is free to make appointments in terms of Para 7.10 L.R. Manual out of the panel as already existed in District – Writ petition allowed. (Para 68,69,70,71)
Facts of the case:
Writ petition filed in Court State Government appoints Government Counsel or refuses to renew their tenure and proposes new panel in districts or after change of Government, in spite of the fact that Supreme Court in unbroken line of decisions has settled law in respect of appointment, termination and renewal of tenure of Government Counsel, litigation unabated.
Findings of the court:
If State Government feels that process of finaling names cannot completed or concluded, nothing on record in present case to establish as to what objective satisfaction was recorded either by Hon'ble Minister, or Chief Secretary Under Secretary or District Magistrate while recommending, testing the appointments only on ground of decision making process, no hesitation in holding that the appointments made vide order are liable to quashed as being wholly, for
The legal document discusses the procedures and principles governing the appointment, renewal, and selection of Government Counsel and Law Officers at the district and high court levels. It emphasizes that these appointments are of public importance and should be made in a fair, transparent, and non-arbitrary manner, primarily based on merit, competence, and public interest (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .
The document highlights that the appointment process must involve consultation with the District Judge or a Committee of Judges to ensure fairness and objectivity (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . Any appointment made without proper adherence to these procedures, especially if influenced by extraneous considerations such as political affinity, is liable to be considered arbitrary and illegal (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .
It is also stressed that no individual has a legal right to appointment or reappointment as a Government Counsel or Public Prosecutor, and claims of such rights should be based solely on merit and proper procedural compliance (!) (!) (!) (!) . The process of appointment should be transparent, with clear criteria, and should avoid political interference (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .
Furthermore, the law requires that the selection process should be free from arbitrariness, and appointments should be made in accordance with the principles of fairness, objectivity, and non-discrimination (!) (!) (!) (!) . Any deviation from prescribed procedures or influence by extraneous factors, especially political considerations, renders the appointment liable to judicial review and potential quashing (!) (!) (!) .
The document also discusses the importance of the role of the District Judge and the need for their effective consultation and opinion in the appointment process to ensure the appointment's integrity and suitability (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .
In summary, the legal principles underscore that appointments of Government Counsel and Law Officers must be made through a fair, transparent, and merit-based process, strictly following the prescribed procedures and involving proper consultation, to uphold the rule of law and prevent arbitrariness or political influence.
ORDER :
Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel, J.
1. I agree with the view of my learned brother and the final order proposed by him but I would like to add few lines of my own to highlight some important aspect of the question involved in the matter.
2. A spate of writ petitions are filed in this Court whenever the State Government appoints Government Counsel (Civil, Criminal and Revenue) or refuses to renew their tenure and proposes new panel in the districts or after change of the Government, in spite of the fact that the Supreme Court in unbroken line of decisions has settled the law in respect of appointment, termination and renewal of tenure of the Government Counsel. The litigation is unabated.
3. The facts of the case have been very clearly and succinctly set out by my learned brother and it is not necessary to repeat the same.
4. Before adverting to the judgments of the Supreme Court on the issue, it would be appropriate to advert to the provisions of the Legal Remembrancer's Manual (L.R. Manual) and the relevant provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C).
5. The L.R. Manual came into force in the year 1975. It contains executive instructions. It regulates, amongst others, the appointments of the District Government Counsel (Criminal, Civil and Revenue) and the State Counsel in the High Court.
6. Chapter I of the L.R. Manual deals with interpretations. Paragraph 1.03 of the L.R. Manual provides that there shall be two branches in the Secretariat of the State Government. In both the branches the Judicial Officers are appointed.
7. Chapter III of the L.R. Manual deals with the Legal Remembrancer to the Government and his duties. Paragraph-3.02 thereof says that he is also called Judicial Secretary. Paragraph-3.04 says that he is the Chief Law Officer of the State. He is a senior Judicial Officer of the District Judge rank. Amongst other, one of his duties is to deal with the appointment of law officers in the High Court and the Supreme Court. Paragraph-3.17 provides that there shall be the posts of Additional, Joint, Deputy and Assistant Legal Remembrancers, and every Additional, Joint and Deputy Legal Remembranchers shall be the ex officio Special Secretary, Joint Secretary and Deputy Secretary respectively.
8. One of the objects to appoint Judicial Officers in the Secretariat is that they are ex-officio authorised to act for the Government in respect of all judicial proceedings and to give proper legal advise to the Government. Paragraph-3.03 lays down the duties of the Judicial Secretary-cum-Legal Remembrancer.
9. Chapter VII of the L.R. Manual contains the provisions relating to the District Government Counsel. Paragraph-7.03 enumerates the procedure for appointment of the Government Counsel in the district. It includes the qualification, consultation by the District Magistrate with the District Judge in respect of the suitability and merit of each candidate. Paragraphs-7.03 and 7.07 of the L.R. Manual, being relevant for the purpose, are extracted below:
“7.03. Applications and qualifications—
(1) Whenever the post of any of the Government Counsel in the district is likely to fall vacant within the next three months, or when a new post has been created, the District Officer concerned shall notify the vacancy to the members of the Bar. Members eligible for consideration would be those having at their credit a practice of 10 years in case of District Government Counsel, 7 years in case of Assistant District Government Counsel and 5 years in case of Sub-District Government Counsel. The District Officer shall ask those who want to be considered for appointment to a particular office to give their names to him with particulars such as age, length of practice at the Bar, proficiency in Hindi, Income-tax paid by them on professional income during last 3 years and if not assessed the return submitted by them, if any, details o
