1. Regard being had to the similitude of the controversy involved in the aforesaid appeals, they have been heard analogously and disposed of by this common order.

2. State of Madhya Pradesh through Principal Secretary, Commissioner and Joint Director of Public Health and Family Welfare Department and Chief Medical and Health Officer, Mandsaur have filed these writ appeals by engaging counsel privately bypassing the office of Advocate General of the State of M.P., to challenge the order passed by Writ Court in Writ Petition No.16057 of 2020 (Kailash Hans v. State of Madhya Pradesh and others) decided on 13.12.2023, whereby the CMO, Mandsaur has been directed to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass the order for grant of benefit after completion of 10 years of service from the date of initial appointment.

3. On 15.04.2025 these writ appeals came up for admission and the Bench made a query that "the State of M.P. or its department could file a writ appeal before High Court by engaging a private counsel".
We directed Shri Vishwajit Joshi, Additional Advocate General, to look into the matter and also appointed Shri Piyush Mathur, learned senior counsel, as amicus curiae to assist this Court.

4. Shri Piyush Mathur, learned senior counsel submits that Art.166(3) of the Constitution of India authorizes the Government to make a rule for more convenient transaction of the business of the Government of the State and for the allocation amongst the Minister of the said business in exercise of power conferred under Art.166(2) and (3) of the Constitution of India. The Government of M.P. published the business (Allocation) Rules and amended them from time to time. As per R.2, the business of the Government will be transacted through various departments in which 'Law and Legislative Affairs' is at serial No.XXI. As per R.3, the business of the Government shall be classified and distributed between the Secretariat Department in the manner specified in the schedule appended to these rules.

5. It is further submitted that in the Law and Legislative Department, there are three wings, namely, Part A - Legal Advising Wing, Part B - Litigation Wing and Part C - Legislative Wing. Clause 11 and Part A deals with the authorization of officers to execute contracts and assurance of property on behalf of the Governor and authorization of officers to sign, verify plaints or written statements in suits by or against the State Government. Part B deals with the Government litigations, Advocate General, Government pleaders and Public Prosecutors. According to Mr. Mathur, learned senior counsel, as per the Business (Allocation) Rules, every litigation on behalf of or against the Government shall be through the officer authorized on an authorization by the Advocate General and Government Advocates on the advice of the Law and Legislative Affairs Department.

6. Shri Mathur, learned senior counsel, further submits that the State Government has framed and published M.P. State Litigation Management Policy, 2018 in M.P. Gazette dated 11.05.2018. As per Clause 26.5 of the Policy, in each case, there will be a proper and quick certification of the need to file an appeal by the Government Advocate through the Office - In - Charge. As per Clause 26.7, no separate permission from the Law Department would be needed in case of review of any order passed by the Court, and if the Advocate General or the Department concerned considers it necessary, the officer - in - charge shall file the same with permission of the Advocate General / Department concerned. Likewise, Clause 26.8 authorises the Collector / District Authority concerned in cases involving the Government land / property under the administrative control of the Collector / District Authority. The Collector shall keep the Head of the Department concerned duly informed of the decisions taken by him with respect to the filing of appeals / revision / SLPs, etc., against any adverse order / judgment conce