“After all, it's tax-payers' money being used in payment”: Allahabad High Court expresses displeasure on excessive appointment of AAGs and CSCs for State
The Allahabad High Court has recently inquired the Chief Secretary of Uttar Pradesh Government on the requirement of so many Additional Advocate General (AAG) and Chief Standing Counsel (CSC) at Allahabad High Court (both benches) for defending the State when there are already 400 State Lawyers impaneled.
A single-judge bench of Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal noted that it was pained to take note of the fact that the State is currently having 6 AAGs at the Allahabad High Court bench and 6 AAGs at the Lucknow Bench of this Court, and moreover, there are 8 CSCs at Allahabad High Court and 10 CSCs at the Lucknow Bench, apart from the number of Additional Chief Standing Counsel, Standing Counsel, and Brief Holders.
Court was dealing with a contempt petition in a land acquisition case, wherein the court reserved its judgment and a request was made by the Additional Advocate General (AAG) M.C. Chaturvedi for his appearance to be noted for the State of UP as well as for the Ghaziabad Development Authority (GDA).
To which, court expressed displeasure and stated, “It has become a routine feature in this Court that AAG and the CSC who are appointed by the State Government to represent their case are also holding the brief of various development authorities and the corporations.”
“Though there is no bar for the same, these counsels are raising bills from the State as well as the development authorities,” added Court.
Court added, “After all it is the taxpayers' money which is being used in the payment of State counsel.”
Further, while emphasizing the large number of cases where the assistance of the State is required but the same is not available, Court said, “If the AAGs and CSCs have sufficient time to represent the development authorities and corporations, then there is no need for the State to have such large panels of lawyers and incur huge financial liability.”
“In case, any such bills have been raised by any AAGs or CSCs from the State and development authority or corporation of the State in one case, the said amount should be recovered from him as it is taxpayers money which cannot be misused,” added Court.
"However, if the two bills are raised by one counsel, one from the Stateside and the other from the development authority, it shows his misconduct", Court further added.
Conclusively, Court directed the Chief Secretary (CS) of the UP Government to apprise the working of the State Law Department in the Court and place the matter/order before the Cabinet for taking appropriate action and make a draft plan as to how the working is to be improved regarding the State counsel in the Allahabad High Court (both benches). "Thereafter, the Cabinet may take the decision, as required, in the best interest of the State,” Court said.
“The CS of State Government shall intimate the progress made in the aforesaid matter to the Registrar General of this Court within two months,” court directed.
Case Title: Ishan International Educational Society Through its Director v. Shri Mukul Singhal Principal Secretary And 4 Others