PIL in Delhi HC challenges appointment of 650 lawyers as Central government counsel; says many yet to clear AIBE

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday sought the Central government's stand on a public interest litigation (PIL) petition challenging the empanelment of more than 650 advocates as Panel Counsel to represent the Union of India before the Supreme Court of India..The plea filed by a body called First Generation Lawyers’ Association alleged that many of those lawyers empaneled by the Central government were yet to clear the All India Bar Examination (AIBE), a requirement to practice law in India.A Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela said that it will hear the matter on December 11 and asked Central government law officer Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Chetan Sharma to take instructions in the matter. "List it next week on Thursday to enable the ASG to obtain instructions," the Court said. .The petitioner alleged that the list issued by the Ministry of Law & Justice on November 21 has raised “serious concerns” within the legal community over alleged irregularities, lack of transparency and inclusion of newly enrolled advocates.According to the petition, several individuals named in the panel were enrolled with State Bar Councils only in 2024 or even 2025, with some yet to clear the AIBE.The Association argued that appointing such inexperienced lawyers to represent the Union of India in the Supreme Court, especially in matters involving constitutional interpretation and national policy, violates constitutional mandates of fairness, equality of opportunity and accountability under Article 14."It is submitted that various past guidelines and established practices require a minimum number of years of practice before an advocate is eligible for government panels. However, the inclusion of advocates with less than one or two years of practice, and in some cases without confirmation of AIBE qualification, prima facie indicates arbitrary exercise of power by the concerned authorities. Moreover, such arbitrariness has a direct bearing on public interest, as government litigation involves public funds and decisions affecting millions of citizens," the plea said.The petitioner submitted that the office of Central Government Counsel performs a crucial public function, requiring expertise and substantial court experience. However, the notification empanelling counsel neither specifies eligibility criteria nor discloses any process of inviting applications, evaluating candidates, or assigning advocates to different categories, each of which carries varying responsibilities..When the matter was heard in the forenoon session, advocate Rudra Vikram Singh appeared for the petitioner-organisation and stated that some of the lawyers empanelled have not even cleared the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) since they registered on the rolls of the bar councils only in 2024 and 2025. The Court then asked the government counsel whether this allegation was correct. "Is it correct that there are advocates who have just a year of practice? Have they been empanelled for the Supreme Court?" the Court asked.It also asked the government about the criteria for empanelment of lawyers and whether there is any minimum experience required. Central Government Standing Counsel (CGSC) Radhik Dubey, appearing for the government, then told the Court that the PIL is not maintainable and the government has the complete discretion to decide who would represent it. "It is the discretion of the government to decide who stays on the panel," Dubey said. She added that the ASG would represent the government in the case, prompting the Bench to pass over the matter. When the case was taken up in the afternoon session, ASG Sharma said that he would look into the issue of whether lawyers who are yet to clear the AIBE exams have been empanelled. The Court then listed the case for hearing on December 11. .The petitioner was represented by advocates Rudra Vikram Singh, Ashirvad Kumar Yadav, Neetu Rani and Rashmi Mehta and Anirudh Tyagi. Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Chetan Sharma along with CGSC Radhika Bishwajit Dubey represented the Union of India. .[Read live-coverage].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.