AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
K. Chandru, J.—The petitioner is a practicing Advocate. She has filed the writ petition seeking to dispose of her representation dated
09.06.2007 within a stipulated time.
In the representation dated 09.06.2007, the petitioner has made certain allegations against another Advocate by name Lita Srinivasan. It was
stated that respondents 1 and 2 should desist from appointing as Law Officer and in case if she was already appointed, she should be removed
from the said post.
The petitioner though being an Advocate has not made the said Lita Srinivasan as a party to the present writ petition. In any event, appointment
of a Government Advocate is purely contractual and it is for the respondents to choose the Advocates for such appointments. In the absence of
any Rule disqualifying the said Advocate, it is not open to this Court to grant any such direction to the respondents to dispose of the petitioner''s
representation. In case, the Advocate (who has not been made as a party) had violated the Rules prescribed by the Bar Council of India, it is for
the petitioner to approach the State Bar Council with appropriate complaint regarding professional misconduct.
In the light of the above, the writ petition is misconceived. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.