G.C.Mathur, J. - (1.) THESE three special appeals have been filed by the State Government against the judgment of a learned Single Judge allowing three writ petitions. All the three writ petitions were filed by Sri Bhola Nath Srivastava, an Advocate of this Court. By one writ peti tion he challenged the appointment of Sri Rishi Ram as Government Advocate; by the second he challenged the appointment of Sri Prem Shankar Gupta as Deputy Government Advocate; and oy the third he challenged the appointments of Sarvsri Girdhar Malaviya, V. P. Goel, T. N. Sinha, S. V. Goswami and S. M. Tripathi as Assis tant Government Advocates. The writ petitions have been allowed and the noti fications appointing these law officers have been quashed on the ground that the ap pointments were made in violation of the provisions of Article 16 (1) of the Consti tution inasmuch as no advertisement or notice was issued, before making the ap pointments, inviting applications from eligi ble members of the Bar for the appoint ments.
(2.) THE general instructions relating to the appointment and tenure of law offi cers of the State of U. P. are given in Appendix B' to the Manual of Rules and Orders relating to the Departmeut of the Legal Remembrancer to Government, U. P. (IV Edition, 1942). By a notification dated June 29, 1968, a new set of general ins tructions were issued by the Governor, re placing the existing ones given in appendix 'B'. Paragraph I of the general ins tructions provides: "Law officers of the State in the High Court, namely, Government Advocate, Ad ditional Government Advocate, Deputy Government Advocates and Assistant Gov ernment Advocates on the criminal side, and Chief Standing counsel and Standing counsel on the civil side, are legal practi tioners appointed by the State Government to conduct in the High Court such Govern ment litigation as may be assigned to them either generally or specially by Govern ment." Paragraph II lays down that a legal prac titioner to be eligible for appointment as a law officer should have a standing of, at least, five years as an Advocate of the High Court. Paragraph III states that no age limits are prescribed for appointments of law officers but appointments snail be made with due regard to physical fitness. Para graph IV, which is important, reads thus:- "The Governor may appoint any quali fied legal practitioner as a Law Officer and, before making any such appointment, he may, if he thinks fit, take into considera tion the views of the Advocate General or of the Chief Justice or any other Judges of the High Court or of any Committee that the Governor may constitute for the purpose. All appointments shall be noti fied in the Official Gazette." Paragraph V provides for the remunera tion etc. of the law officers and para graph VI for their tenure. Sri Rishi Ram was appointed Government Advocate for a period of three years by a notification dated October 30, 1968. By another notification dated November 11, 1971, his term was extend ed by one year. Sri Prem Shanker Gupta was appointed Deputy Government Advo cate by a notification dated March 18, 1971, for a period of three years. The five persons named above were appointed Assistant Government Advocates by a noti fication dated March 18,, 1971, upto Febru ary 28, 1972. Admittedly, no advertise ments or notices, inviting applications for these appointments, were issued by the State Government. The appointments were, however, made by the State Govern ment after consulting the Advocate-Gene ral.
(3.) THE petitioner challenged the appointments on three grounds, namely, (i) that they were made in violation of Article 16 (1) of the Constitution; (ii) that paragraph IV of the general instructions, under which the appointments were made, offended Article 14 of the Constitution; and (iii) that the appointments were made mala fide and amounted to nepotism. Since the learned Single Judge decided in favour of the petitioner on the first ground, he did not go into the other two grounds. ;