Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea has been filed before the Lucknow bench of Allahabad High Court against the recent engagement of state law officers in the High Court. The plea alleges that the said list was prepared by the Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh, and only the members of the R.S.S./ Officer Bearers have been appointed. 

Three Lawyers of the high court, Advocates Rama Shankar Tiwari, Shashank Kumar Shukla and ​​Arvind Kumar have moved the high court for quashing the list of selected State Law Officers/ Brief Holders (Civil and Criminal) issued by the State Government through Special Secretary, Law & Justice on August 1, 2022.

The plea filed through Advocates Alok Kirti Mishra and D.K. Tripathi states that the petitioners got information from reliable sources that the appointment list of State Law Officers was made on the recommendation of Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh (RSS) and several Advocates who hold different positions in the Sangh have been appointed.

"In the list of 220 members, some Advocates are relatives of dominant politicians in State and some are relatives of the Judicial officers and few are juniors or followers of Additional Advocate Generals in High Court Lucknow or High Court Allahabad," the plea adds.

Further questioning the credibility of the selection process, the petitioners rely on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab vs. Brijeshwar Singh Chahal, wherein the Supreme Court laid down guidelines on the engagement of government lawyers.

The petitioners have contended that the present list has been published in utter violation of these guidelines. "Neither any application has been invited nor any committee has been constituted and from the back door State Law Officers and Brief Holders ( Civil and Criminal ) have been appointed in an illegal and arbitrary manner," the plea reads. 

Moreover, the plea states that out of the total of 220 selected State Law Officers/Brief Holder (Civil and Criminal) at Lucknow Bench of the High Court, some Advocates who have not completed 5 years of practice have been selected.

Apart from that, the petitioners have questioned the number of posts of Chief Standing Counsels in the Lucknow Bench.

"6 persons have been appointed as Chief Standing Counsel and huge public money has been spent as salary and expenses. In Oudh Bar Association Number of the death claims are pending and Oudh Bar Association is unable to pay due to lack of money and on the other side State Government is spending huge amount of money upon 1st to 6th Chief Standing Counsels without any occasion," the plea reads.

The petitioners have, therefore, sought issuance of a writ, order or direction, in the nature of Certiorari quashing of the impugned selected list. 

Constitution of a committee for the appointment of the eligible Advocates as State Law Officer/ Brief Holder as per judgment of State of Punjab vs. Brijeshwar Singh Chahal has also been sought. And along with that, a reduced number of CSC posts and an inquiry into the alleged irregularities in the appointments has been demanded as well.

Case Title: Rama Shankar Tiwari and 2 Ors v. State of UP and Ors.