Professional ethicsGovernment pleaderSupreme Court of India

Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi v State of U.P.

(1991) 1 SCC 212; AIR 1991 SC 53719901 min read
The case in brief30-second read
Facts
By a circular dated 6.2.1990 the State of U.P. terminated the appointment of all Government Counsel (Civil, Criminal, Revenue) in the districts with effect from 28.2.1990, whether or not their terms had expired, and directed fresh panels.
Issue
Is the engagement of Government Counsel a purely private client-counsel contract, terminable at will, or does Art. 14 apply?
Held
Under the Legal Remembrancer's Manual, Government Counsel in the districts are law officers of the State holding an "office" or "post".
Principle
Appointment of District Government Counsel carries a public element, so its termination must satisfy Art. 14; the blanket termination circular was arbitrary.
Cite this

Facts

  • By a circular dated 6.2.1990 the State of U.P. terminated the appointment of all Government Counsel (Civil, Criminal, Revenue) in the districts with effect from 28.2.1990, whether or not their terms had expired, and directed fresh panels.
  • The High Court rejected the challenge; the counsel came to the Supreme Court.

Issue

  1. Is the engagement of Government Counsel a purely private client-counsel contract, terminable at will, or does Art. 14 apply?

Held

  • Under the Legal Remembrancer's Manual, Government Counsel in the districts are law officers of the State holding an "office" or "post".
  • "All Government Counsel are paid remuneration out of the public exchequer and there is a clear public element attaching to the 'office' or 'post'."
  • That public element is enough to attract Art. 14; the circular was arbitrary and was quashed. Even contractual State action must be non-arbitrary.

Ratio decidendi

State action in engaging and removing its law officers is subject to Art. 14; it cannot be defended as a private client's freedom to change counsel.

Exam use

How to use it in an answer

  • Part A (6 marks): Cite for the public character of the office of Government Counsel.
  • Part B (16 marks): Use with Johri Mal: no civil post, but a public office subject to Art. 14.
  • Key line for exam: "There is a clear public element attaching to the 'office' or 'post'."

Cite this

Citation

Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi v State of U.P. (1991) 1 SCC 212; AIR 1991 SC 537

Reported: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1261492/. This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.