The court directed that a PIL challenging government panel appointments be treated as a formal representation, allowing the competent authority to address grievances and frame transparent empanelment policies within a set timeframe, adhering to principles of administrative law and judicial restraint.

1. This public interest litigation has been filed with the following prayers:-

“a) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby directing the Respondent Union of India to forthwith place before this Hon’ble Court the complete record of the empanelment process, including the criteria adopted, marking sheets, evaluation mechanism, objections (if any), and the material considered for preparing the impugned panel list dated 21.11.2025;

b) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby quashing the impugned panel/empanelment list dated 21.11.2025 to the extent it includes persons who are ineligible and who do not fulfil the notified, statutory, or policy-based eligibility criteria;

c) Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent Union of India to frame and notify a transparent, objective and uniform set of eligibility criteria for appointment /engagement of Central Government Counsel before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, including minimum experience, case-handling exposure, AIBE qualification, domain knowledge, and demonstrable competence;

d) Issue a writ of Mandamus directing that all future empanelment exercises be conducted through a fair, transparent, merit-based process, including: (i) publication of vacancies and eligibility criteria, (ii) open invitations for applications, (iii) a uniform marking/screening system, and (iv) publication of a reasoned list of selected and rejected candidates to ensure accountability;

e) Direct the Respondent Union of India to place before this Hon’ble Court the list of all advocates who applied for panel positions, the evaluation applied to each, and the minutes/notings that led to the selection of the 654 advocates under Group A panel, so that the arbitrariness and deviation from uniform standards may be examined by this Hon’ble Court;

f) Issue a writ or order directing the constitution of an Independent Screening Committee comprising retired judges/independent legal experts for supervising future empanelment processes of Central Government Counsel before the Supreme Court, so as to remove arbitrariness, nepotism, lack of transparency, and ensure equal opportunity to first-generation advocates and meritorious candidates;

g) Pass such other and further order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.

2. Essentially the petitioner, which is said to be an Association of Lawyers, challenges the panel of lawyers prepared by the Government of India, which is embodied in the list dated 21.11.2025. Various grounds have been taken in the writ petition pointing out as to how a particular individual included in the said panel is ineligible.

3. Apart from seeking a prayer for quashing the names of those who are ineligible, from the panel dated 21.11.2025, the petitioner has also prayed for issuing direction to the respondents to frame guidelines/take appropriate decision for putting in place a transparent/uniform procedure for empanelment of lawyers to represent the Union of India before various Courts/fora and other Government Bodies. Certain suggestions have also been given in the writ petition.

4. Our attention has been drawn by Mr.Chetan Sharma, learned ASG to an order dated 17.12.2025 passed by this Court whereby W.P.(C) 19141/2025 was disposed of in terms of the statement made by the learned Solicitor General on behalf of the Union of India to the effect that the entire matter should be left to the Union of India fo