- (1.) In this bunch of writ petitions, question and dispute involved relates to appointment of District Government Counsels in District and Sessions courts of the State of U.P. Substantial question of law is of public importance and common in all the writ petitions. Factual background in these bunch of writ petitions is also with slight difference are more or less same. Hence, with the consent of parties, we decide the writ petitions by present common judgment.
(2.) Keeping in view lengthy argument, advanced by the parties' counsel, we are adjudicating the dispute under the following heads : (I) Maintainability of writ petition (II) Role of Public Prosecutors (III) Appointment and Renewal (IV) Government's right - whether statutory ? (V) Opinion of District Judge (VI) Impugned order and the binding precedent (VII) Overruling of judgments by Executive Order, not permissible. (VIII) Undertaking/statement before the court, shifting of stand and change of government. (IX) Doctrine of Finality (X) Section 25-A of CrPC and Repugnancy (XI) Office of L.R. of State of U.P. and its failure (XII) Omission and Arbitrariness (XIII) Cost (XIV) Some individual cases (XV) Rule of Law (XVI) Finding (XVII) Order
(3.) Writ Petition No.7851(M/B) of 2008 shall be leading writ petition, followed by writ petition No.3922(M/B) of 2011 and 4179(M/B) of 2011 and other petitions.;