KAMAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition has been filed for quashing of the order dated 8.12016 (Annexure No.6 to the Writ Petition) where under amongst other name of one Babu Singh Yadav, Advocate, Banda has been recommended by the State Government for being appointed as A.D.G.C. (Criminal) for representing the State in District Courts at Banda. The order is challenged basically on the ground that the penal as prepared in consultation with the District Judge, did not include the name of Babu Singh Yadav in any of the five panels prepared. Name of Babu Singh Yadav was included in the letter forwarded by the District Magistrate to the State Government in exercise of power under proviso to Clause 7 (3) of the L.R.Manual as amended under letter of the government dated 30.7.2012.

(2.) According to the petitioner Proviso to Clause 7(3) of the L.R.Manual does confer a power upon the District Magistrate to include the name of the advocate, who has not submitted his application in response to the advertisement/information notified under proviso to Clause 7(3) of the L.R.Manual, but such power of the District Magistrate to include the name of non-applicant in the list will not result in diluting the requirement of consultation with the District Judge as is required under proviso to Clause 7(3) of the L.R.Manual.

(3.) Sri O.P.Singh, learned senior advocate assisted by Sri Ram Singh contended before this Court that the name of Babu Singh Yadav was included in the panel by the District Magistrate after necessary consultation with the District Judge, Banda as would be clear from the letter dated 11.7.2016. Therefore according to him there is no illegality.