ASHOK PANDEY ADVOCATE Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the Instant writ petition, the petitioner an advocate, claiming to espouse the cause of the public in the form of Public Interest Litigation, has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the letter of respondent No. 2 as contained in Annexure-3 dated 11th January. 2000, to the writ petition. He further prayed for a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to clarify to all the State Governments that there cannot be an Additional Advocate General and to advise them to remove the Additional Advocate General appointed by them. Third prayer made in the writ petition is for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 not to allow respondent Nos. 5 to 8 to work as Advocate General and Additional Advocate General respectively and to cancel the order of appointment of respondent Nos. 5 to 8.

(2.) The contention of the writ petitioner is that the Constitution only contemplated for the appointment of Advocate General and there exists no provision in the Constitution of India for the appointment of Additional Advocate General. In that regard, the petitioner cited the example of the President. Vice-President, Prime Minister. Attorney General of India and other constitutional offices and has submitted that there cannot be an Additional President. Additional Vice-President or Additional Prime Minister or like that there cannot be an Additional Advocate General.

(3.) Thus, the argument of the petitioner, in nutshell, appears to be is that although the Constitution of India does not provide for the appointment of Additional Advocate General for the State, the appointment of respondent Nos. 6 to 8 is non-est, inasmuch as. Article 165 of the Constitution of India only mandates for the appointment of Advocate General. The office of the Advocate General, which is constitutional in nature, cannot be bifurcated. It was asserted by the petitioner that the Office of the Advocate General is one of the fifteen Constitutional offices of the Country. When the framers of the Constitution have not created the Office of Additional Advocate General, the Government of U. P. can in no case appoint the Additional Advocate General.