Government of India one of largest litigants in country, has freedom to appoint its own lawyers: Delhi High Court

The Government of India is one of the largest litigants in the country and has the freedom to appoint its own lawyers, the Delhi High Court held while rejecting a plea challenging the method of empanelment of advocates to represent the Central government [Rajinder Nishchal v. Union of India Through its Secretary & Anr]. .A Division Bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad noted that there is no fixed salary of the lawyers empanelled by the Central government. These lawyers are not even paid a retainer fee and they are paid on a case-to-case basis.“A litigant can always choose a lawyer to represent him and the Government of India, which is one of the largest litigant in the country, has the freedom to appoint its own lawyers. This Court is of the view that the present petition is nothing but a Publicity Interest Litigation,” the order stated..The Bench was dealing with a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by an one Rajinder Nischal. It was contended that the size of the panel to represent the Central government is not fixed and that the government does not invite applications for appointment or renewal of the panel.Nischal argued that the appointment of advocates as government counsel is contrary to the law laid down by the Supreme Court in State of Punjab v. Brijeshwar Singh Chahal..At the outset, the Court noted that the petitioner himself was an empanelled government counsel and at the time of his empanelment. Neither there was any fixed panel to represent the government nor was he subjected to any written examination before his appointment.The Bench further said that the challenge before the Supreme Court in the Brijeshwar Singh Chahal case was for a post while in the present case, the challenge is for the mode of empanelment of lawyers and not appointment of lawyers to a post.“It seems that the Petitioner, who is an Advocate, has filed the present petition after being a beneficiary of the very same process which has been assailed in the present Writ Petition only because he has been denied extension or reappointment.”.The Bench dismissed the PIL, noting in the order,“This Court is of the view that no public interest is involved in the present petition and it has been filed only to upset the apple cart.”.Petitioner Rajinder Nischal appeared in person.The Central government was represented by Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Chetan Sharma, Central Government Standing Counsel (CGSC) Apoorv Kurup and Advocates Amit Gupta and Ojaswa Pathak..[Read Order]