Snehal Upadhyay –
The Madras High Court upheld the validity of an amendment made to the rules for governing the appointment of government advocates under the Law Officers of High Court of Madras and its Bench at Madurai (Appointment) Rules, 2017 by disposing off the petition which find fault with the 2019 amendment made to this act.
The amended rules mentioned that one could be only eligible to be appointed as a High Court advocate only if they get a letter from their seniors stating that they have assisted and worked in the High Court for not less than three years.
The petitioner raised the issue of concern that any inexperienced advocate may use this rule and can easily be appointed as the law officers which would adversely affect the administration of justice.
The Court said that “If we are to accept the argument of the petitioner, then we would be undermining the statement, which a senior would make for his junior while certifying that he worked and assisted him in the matters before this Court for a period of three years. To the best of the knowledge of this Court, every senior would always cherish and be proud of the achievements of his/her juniors when they occupy various positions. Therefore, the petitioner should give utmost credence and solemnity to the letter given by the senior certifying that his junior instructed him in the matters before this Court for a period of three years. Thus, we find that there is no irrationality or illegality or arbitrariness nor any discrimination in Rule 4(i) (k) for it to be struck down.”
The Court has also taken a note from the State’s submission that its taking steps to make a regular appointments for the vacant posts of the law officers with accordance to the rules of 2017, which was earlier been upheld in the case of V. Vasanthakumar vs Chief Secretary, Tamil Nadu and ors by a High Court division bench in 2018.