Delhi HC Seeks Centre’s Response on PIL Challenging Appointment of 650 Lawyers as Government Counsel
Court has asked the Central government to respond to a PIL questioning the transparency and legality of appointing over 650 lawyers as government counsel in the Supreme Court
Delhi High Court Seeks Centre’s Response on PIL Challenging Appointment of 650 Government Lawyers
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday sought the Union government’s response on a Public Interest Litigation challenging the recent empanelment of more than 650 advocates as Central government counsel for the Supreme Court.
The bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela asked Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma to obtain instructions from the government.
The Bench said the matter will be taken up again next Wednesday to allow time for the government to respond.
Advocate Rudra Vikram, representing the First Generation Lawyers’ Association (FGLA), argued that the empanelment exercise was riddled with irregularities.
According to the plea, the list includes several advocates who were enrolled recently and, in some cases, individuals who may not have cleared the All India Bar Examination.
The petition states that “the list includes numerous advocates enrolled only in 2024 and even 2025, and in some cases individuals who may not have cleared the AIBE, thereby raising serious doubts about the criteria, objectivity and legality of the selection exercise.”
It further argues that the role of Central government counsel is of constitutional significance as they represent the Union of India before the Supreme Court in sensitive constitutional matters, statutory appeals and issues impacting public administration. The plea asserts that such appointments must comply with Article 14 and principles of fairness, transparency and equal opportunity.
While highlighting the lack of transparency, the plea says, “the notification does not disclose any criteria used for selecting candidates, invitation for applications or objective evaluation parameters, creating a legitimate apprehension that the empanelment has been carried out in an arbitrary manner.”
The PIL seeks directions to the Centre to frame a uniform eligibility framework, including minimum experience, AIBE qualification, domain expertise and demonstrable competence.
It also seeks the formation of an independent screening committee comprising retired judges and senior legal experts to oversee future appointments and prevent nepotism and arbitrary selection.
The matter will be heard next week.
Case Title: First Generation Lawyers Association (FGLA) v. Union of India & Or
Bench: Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela
Hearing Date: 3 December 2025