Pradeep Kant and Ajai Kumar Singh, JJ. - (1.) THIS petition by Avinash Chandra Srivastava, advocate challenges the order dated 6.7.04, by means of which his renewal as Additional District Government Counsel (Criminal) has been refused.
(2.) THE Petitioner was appointed as Additional District Government Counsel (Criminal) in the Judgeship of Gonda on 30.10.98 for a period of one year. His term was further extended for a period of three years on 7.2.2000. The recommendations of the District Judge as well as that of the District Magistrate were sent to the State Government for extending the term of the Petitioner on 24.3.03. However, before the matter regarding the renewal of Petitioner's term could be considered, an incident took place in the district on 21.1.04, where the lawyers went on strike against the decision of the State Government, abolishing Devi Patan Mandal and on that date, when the Petitioner was assisting the Court assigned to him, police entered into the premises of Gonda Judgeship and assaulted the Petitioner in the Court room. The Petitioner was injured and was taken to the office of the Superintendent of Police, where after medical treatment, he was allowed to go. The aforesaid incident in which the Petitioner suffered injuries because of rowdyism and disorder in the Court premises, the fact of taking the Petitioner to the office of the Superintendent of Police, persuaded the District Magistrate to send his comments/report of the incident to the State Government, where the Petitioner's case for renewal of term was under consideration, saying that the Petitioner was arrested on the aforesaid date and was later on released on bail, therefore, he is not a fit person to continue as Additional District Government Counsel.
(3.) THE order refusing renewal, however, does not specify any reasons but in the counter -affidavit filed by the State and also in the argument raised by the learned Counsel for the State, it has been stressed that since the Petitioner was arrested and was later on released on bail in the incident mentioned above, his case for renewal was rejected. Half heartedly it has also been argued that recommendations of the District Judge, as a matter of fact, though said that the work and conduct of the Petitioner was good/satisfactory but he did not make any further recommendation for renewal of his term and the District Magistrate did not give his own opinion and, therefore, also his non -renewal was justified.;