'Degrades' AG's Office: Allahabad HC Strikes Down Amendment Shifting Appointment Powers From Advocate General To Law Secretary

The Allahabad High Court has struck down the Uttar Pradesh Advocate General and Law Officer Establishment Service (Fourth Amendment) Rules, 2022 to the extent that they replace the Advocate General of Uttar Pradesh with the Principal Secretary (Law), State of Uttar Pradesh as the appointing authority of various posts.The principle Rules which govern the service conditions of the employees of the Advocate General and Law Officers establishment were amended on 27th December, 2022. The amended rules sought to remove the Advocate General as the appointing authority (consequently, as the disciplinary authority) of most of the ministerial staff in his office. Instead, such powers of the Advocate General have been vested in the Principal Secretary (Law) of the State of Uttar Pradesh. The bench comprising Chief Justice Pritinker Diwaker and Justice Ashutosh Srivastava observed, “The amended rules clearly degrade the office of the Advocate General and render it vulnerable to outside pressures and extraneous influences besides compromising the entire functioning of the office of the Advocate General. In the long run it is the cause of law constitutional order and justice which will suffer irremediably as a result of the aforesaid amendments”The Court further observed,“The amended impugned service Rules create a dichotomy where the constitutional responsibility remains in the Advocate General but administrative power to appoint, supervise & discipline the staff resides in the Legal Remembrancer/Principal Secretary (Law). The consequences of the service rules are not far to seek. The service rules will create authorities times working at cross purposes. This will neither be the interest of department nor in public interest.” The Court held that setting up of parallel disciplinary authority takes away the independence of the office of the Advocate General which would in turn result in loss of ability of the Advocate General to “give independent advice regardless the pulls of vested interests or pressures of political expediency.”The Court further struck down the rules as being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The Court held,“It is interesting to see that the Advocate General is retained as the appointing authority of the most subordinate posts. However, the Legal Remembrancer/Principal Secretary (Law), who is subordinate to the Advocate General in the order of precedent has been made the appointing authority of all senior posts in the office of the Advocate General. The said classification is unreasonable and arbitrary which does not subserve the object which is sought to be achieved and is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.Arguments AdvancedU.P. State Law Officers Ministerial Staff Association High Court, Allahabad challenged the rules on grounds being contrary to Article 165 of the Constitution of India. It was contended that the rules were violative of Article 14 of the Constitution as they created an unreasonable classification. Further, it was contended that the amended service rules will lead to loss of authority of the office of the Advocate General and will adversely impact the functioning of the high office. Lastly, it was pleaded that the amended service rules do not subserve the purpose sought to be achieved by the State Government.Defending the amendment to the service rules, Additional Advocate General contended that since the Advocate General is very busy discharging duties of the office, the control of the staff of the Advocate General Office is being vested in the Principal Secretary (Law), State of Uttar Pradesh. It was contended that office of the Advocate General will not be impacted by the said amendment as his functions are not being interfered with. It was contended that the State being the employer of the staff of the office of the Advocate General has the right to frame rules of service. “The rules are consistent with Article 14 and no one can question the prerogative of the State to frame service conditions for the benefit of the employees and the departments.”High Court VerdictThe Court observed that the post of Advocate General of a State is a constitutional office under Article 165 of the Constitution of India. The Court observed that by tradition, Advocate General is the senior most law officer of the State and pater familias (male head of a family) of the Bar. “The Advocate General is entitled to precedence over all other advocates and is also given the right to first audience in Courts as a matter of practice. The Advocate General of the State of the Uttar Pradesh is an ex officio member of the Bar Council of the State of Uttar Pradesh. On this footing alone the Advocate General can be called the First Advocate of the State.”The Court referred to Joginder Singh Wasu v. State of Punjab wherein the Supreme Court observed that“The position of the State vis-a-vis the Advocate General may be described in the words of William Shakespeare:“Whose worth is...

'Degrades' AG's Office: Allahabad HC Strikes Down Amendment Shifting Appointment Powers From Advocate General To Law Secretary

Upasna Agrawal

Tags