The Allahabad High Court has expressed a serious concern over the repeated lack of assistance from State law officers when it adjudicates cases pending before it [Subedar Yadav v State of Uttar Pradesh and 4 Others]

A Division Bench of Justice Ajit Kumar and Justice Devendra Singh took note of the statements made by government counsel that the problem has arisen due to a severe shortage of Class III and IV staff in the State Law Office.

It lies within the domain of the UP Subordinate Services Commission to advertise the vacancies as per its own schedule, the Court was told.

The Bench, therefore, directed the Commission to expeditiously ensure selections on the vacant posts and apprise it about the status of the recruitment process initiated pursuant to the requisitions sent to it on March 20.

"We are seriously concerned with the present situation in the Establishment of the Advocate General-cum-State Law Officer for the reason that working of the Office has reduced to such a level that proper assistance is not being rendered to the Courts leading to delay in justice," the Court said in an order passed on March 30.

The Court had taken note of such a lack of assistance from law officers in February, while dealing with a plea challenging a recovery of dues under the UP Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963.

The government had failed to respond to the plea, even after State counsel repeatedly sought time to seek instructions.

"We have been noticing recently that in a number of cases that despite several reminders made by the Standing Counsel of the Court to the authorities, the authorities have not been responding in time," the Court wrote in an order passed on February 26.

It had also noted that the government's standing counsel were not fully aware of the case details as the files were not sent to them in advance.

On the argument that the problems had arisen due to a shortage of support staff, the Court had said,

"If there is any shortage of staff and the recruitment is not taking place for a long period of time, then it is either the Government to be blamed or the office of the Advocate General but in no circumstance the Court can be forced to wait for instructions and for the proper assistance from Standing Counsel it amounts to interference in the administration of justice and this ultimately leads to further add on the pendency."

The Court had then asked the government to apprise it of the steps taken to expedite the recruitment process. However, on March 16, the Court recorded that no affidavit was filed on this, despite the passing of a detailed order expressing concern over the situation.

It also criticised the State's top law officer for not appearing before it.

"We have carefully gone through the instructions and we find that since 27.01.2023 and as late as on 26.02.2026 repeatedly Government has been asking the learned Advocate General about the information to be given regarding vacant positions in his Office so that the matter of recruitment should be expedited but to our dismay, we does not find any reply letter by the learned Advocate General in instructions placed today before us. Learned Advocate General is also not present before this Court, nor any learned Additional Advocate General is present in Court, we this situation to be unhappy and unfortunate," the Court said in the order passed on March 16.

On March 30, Additional Advocate General MC Chaturvedi, Chief Standing Counsel Manoj Kumar Singh, Additional Chief Standing Counsel Pankaj Rai and Additional Chief Standing Counsel Suresh Singh appeared before the Court.

A personal affidavit from Manmeet Singh Suri, Special Secretary (Law) and Additional Legal Remembrancer of the government of Uttar Pradesh, was also filed to bring on record the requisition sent to the Commission for filling the 50 vacant law officer positions with respect to both the Allahabad and Lucknow Benches of the High Court.

The Court has now also sought details about promotions in the State law office.

"Learned counsel for the State is directed to file an affidavit clarifying the positions of vacancies of Level-VIII upon which the promotions can be made in the Office of Establishment of Advocate General/State Law Officer," the Court directed.

The matter will be heard next on April 17.

Advocate Ashish Malhotra represents the petitioner.

[Read Order]