Madras HC| Treesa Sunil | Social Thikana
In A. Kannan v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors., the petitioner, an advocate pointed out the consequences which will occur if inexperienced advocates are appointed as law officers, and that it would affect the administration of justice of this Court.
Amendment was made in 2019 to the Law Officers of High Court of Madras and its Bench at Madurai (Appointment) Rules, 2017 which laid down the eligibility to be appointed as Law Officers of High Court. The gist of this amended rule was that to be eligible to become a law officer, one has to produce a letter from his senior that shows three years’ experience. The petitioner said that this rule is likely to be misused by young and inexperienced advocates.
The advocate for the respondents stated that that the process of selection is yet to begin and every care would be taken to select and appoint the best candidates in a fair and transparent manner, in accordance with law.
The court found the arguments of the respondents inadequate, and upheld the validity of the amended rule. The court said that the petitioners should give utmost credence and solemnity to the letter given by the senior certifying that his junior has been instructed by him in the matters before this Court for a period of three years.