NEW DELHI, Mar 30:
The Supreme Court today expressed concern over the appointment of public prosecutors without “any real assessment or policy” as it framed guidelines for selection and appointment of law officers in states, saying the prevailing process lacked transparency.
“No lawyer has a right to be appointed as State Government counsel or as public prosecutor at any level, nor does he have a vested right to claim extension in the term for which he/she is initially appointed.
“We have also held that all candidates who are eligible for any such appointment can offer themselves for re-appointment or extension, in which event their claims can and ought to be considered on their merit uninfluenced by any political or other extraneous consideration,” a bench headed by Chief Justice T S Thakur said.
The court said there was lack of transparency in the entire process of appointment of law officers due to which it had to issue guidelines which could be followed by the states.
Stressing the need for a credible process of selection of public prosecutors, the apex court suggested that a selection committee headed by Secretary, Law Commission can look into the appointments of law officers in all the states.
“This process (of appointment) can be primarily left to the State Government who can appoint a Committee of officers to carry out the same. It will be useful if the Committee of officers has the Secretary to Government, Law Department, who is generally a judicial officer on deputation with the Government as its Member-Secretary.
“The Committee can even invite applications from eligible candidates for different positions. The conditions of eligibility for appointment can be left to the Government or the Committee depending upon the nature and the extent of work which the appointees may be effected to handle,” the bench, also comprising Justices R Banumathi and U U Lalit, said.
While dealing with the issue of appointment of law officers in Punjab and Haryana, the court said the committee will give the names and profiles of law officers to the Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court, who will recommend the names of law officers along with suggestions to both the states, after which the appointments can be made.
“Absence of a proper assessment of the requirement for State counsel leads to situations that have been adversely commented upon by the CAG in his report to which we have made a reference in the earlier part of this judgment.
“The problem gets compounded by those in power adding to the strength of Government advocates, not because they are required but because such appointments serve the object of appeasement or private benevolence shown to those who qualify for the same. The CAG has in that view rightly observed that there ought to be a proper assessment of the need before such appointments are made,” the bench said. (PTI)
Follow our WhatsApp channel