MANUAL NIXON Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Registry of this Court has raised an objection regarding the appearance memo filed by the Standing Counsel for the 8th respondent - The Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority and insisted on a vakalath being filed. The learned Counsel has questioned the said objection.

(2.) The Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority has appointed a Standing Counsel. However, when the said Counsel for the 8th respondent filed a memo of appearance, the Registry of this Court noticed a defect referring to an Office Circular dtd. 12/9/2018 that all Statutory Bodies, Public Sector Companies, Nationalized Banks, Universities, etc. and appended as Annexure II to the said circular be allowed to appoint Standing Counsel subject to the filing of a vakalath. The objection by the Registry states that though the 8th respondent is a statutory authority and has a Standing Counsel, a vakalath will have to be filed as against a memo of appearance.

(3.) Sri. M.P.Prakash, the learned Standing Counsel for the 8th respondent submitted that the whole purpose of appointing a Standing Counsel is defeated by insisting on a vakalat nama to be filed, especially when Rules provide otherwise. The learned Counsel submitted that as a Statutory body created under the an Act of Parliament and by a Gazette notification, the requirement for a vakalath ought to be avoided.