Read Time: 06 minutes

The Allahabad High Court has directed the State Government of Uttar Pradesh to take a decision over the appointment of the Advocate General in the State by May 16, 2022. The direction has come in a Public Interest Litigation moved by a practicing lawyer of the court for the earliest appointment of the new Advocate General (AG).

The incumbent AG has tendered his resignation, though the same has not been accepted. However, Court found that the incumbent AG after submitting his resignation has vacated his official accommodation and his office in the High Court, Lucknow. He has also not been discharging the duties and functions of the office of Advocate General.

Taking note of the non-availability of the AG, the division bench of Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Subhash Vidyarthi stressed, "The office of Advocate General cannot be permitted to be left vacant. Any vacuum in the office of a constitutional functionary may lead to very unsavory situation and that would be completely impermissible not only having regard to the scheme of our constitution but also bearing in mind various statutory functions which are to be performed by the Advocate General."

Leveling multiple allegations against the lawyers' community at large, the petitioner in this PIL, Rama Kant Dixit, had alleged that some 'big lawyers' are trying to manage their appointment as Advocate General and for that, they are willing to pay crores of rupees to persons who can manage their appointment on the post.

Therefore, Dixit had sought Court's direction to the State government to appoint new Advocate General for State without any further delay after accepting the resignation of the incumbent AG already submitted to the government long ago.

Though Court found that Dixit had made some irresponsible statements in his writ petition, for which he has also been discharged from the petition, Court took note of the non-availability of the AG. 

Therefore, dismissing Dixit's petition to the extent of his prayer regarding fixation of the monthly remuneration to be paid to the AG (Attorney General for Bharat as well Advocate General for the State), Court decided to hear the issue of appointment of the new AG.

Accordingly, directing the State to take a decision in this regard before the next date of hearing, Court ordered the office to change the cause title of the instant petition and register it as "Suo Motu PIL in re: Appointment of/Vacancy in the office of Advocate General".

Court said, "We express our solemn hope and expectation that by the next date of listing, the State shall take all remedial measures to ensure that the office of Advocate General does not remain either vacant or non-functional."