You are here: Home » PTI Stories » National » News
Business Standard

HC declines to entertain plea on law officers' appointment

Press Trust of India  |  Chennai 

The Madras High today disposed of a batch of PILs challenging the present system of appointment of state officers, saying the matter comes under the purview of the

The ruling by Acting Chief Justice Huluvadi G Ramesh and Justice RMT Teeka Raman was in contrary to the stand taken earlier by another bench which had appointed an amicus curie to frame draft rules for appointment of the officers who represent the state in various courts.



Earlier, a bench led by Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul (since elevated to the Supreme Court) had appointed senior advocates A L Somayaji and R Krishnamoorthy as the amicus curie to go into framing of the rules.

Subsequently, the draft rules were submitted by the two lawyers in the previous hearing on February 14 following which the bench had then said it would be open to the state to proceed and notify the rules, unless they have some concern.

Posting the matter for today, the bench had also said the could bring to the notice of the such concerns.

When the matter came up for hearing today, the bench led by the Acting Chief Justice in its order said the appointment of officers was purely under the domain of the state and asked how the can interfere.

Disposing of the petitions, including one by advocate V Vasanthakumar, the bench gave liberty to the state to act in accordance with the Supreme guidelines in the matter.

It further said if there was any violation of the apex guidelines, the petitioners may approach the

Vasanthakumar had alleged that it was an unwritten rule that whichever party comes to power, advocates, with leanings toward the party, were appointed as officers.

The petitioners had sought a direction to the state to appoint law-knowing persons and not political leaders as officers for different courts.

(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

RECOMMENDED FOR YOU

HC declines to entertain plea on law officers' appointment

The Madras High Court today disposed of a batch of PILs challenging the present system of appointment of state law officers, saying the matter comes under the purview of the government. The ruling by Acting Chief Justice Huluvadi G Ramesh and Justice RMT Teeka Raman was in contrary to the stand taken earlier by another bench which had appointed an amicus curie to frame draft rules for appointment of the officers who represent the state government in various courts. Earlier, a bench led by Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul (since elevated to the Supreme Court) had appointed senior advocates A L Somayaji and R Krishnamoorthy as the amicus curie to go into framing of the rules. Subsequently, the draft rules were submitted by the two lawyers in the previous hearing on February 14 following which the bench had then said it would be open to the state government to proceed and notify the rules, unless they have some concern. Posting the matter for today, the bench had also said the ... The Madras High today disposed of a batch of PILs challenging the present system of appointment of state officers, saying the matter comes under the purview of the

The ruling by Acting Chief Justice Huluvadi G Ramesh and Justice RMT Teeka Raman was in contrary to the stand taken earlier by another bench which had appointed an amicus curie to frame draft rules for appointment of the officers who represent the state in various courts.

Earlier, a bench led by Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul (since elevated to the Supreme Court) had appointed senior advocates A L Somayaji and R Krishnamoorthy as the amicus curie to go into framing of the rules.

Subsequently, the draft rules were submitted by the two lawyers in the previous hearing on February 14 following which the bench had then said it would be open to the state to proceed and notify the rules, unless they have some concern.

Posting the matter for today, the bench had also said the could bring to the notice of the such concerns.

When the matter came up for hearing today, the bench led by the Acting Chief Justice in its order said the appointment of officers was purely under the domain of the state and asked how the can interfere.

Disposing of the petitions, including one by advocate V Vasanthakumar, the bench gave liberty to the state to act in accordance with the Supreme guidelines in the matter.

It further said if there was any violation of the apex guidelines, the petitioners may approach the

Vasanthakumar had alleged that it was an unwritten rule that whichever party comes to power, advocates, with leanings toward the party, were appointed as officers.

The petitioners had sought a direction to the state to appoint law-knowing persons and not political leaders as officers for different courts.

(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

image
Business Standard
177 22

HC declines to entertain plea on law officers' appointment

The Madras High today disposed of a batch of PILs challenging the present system of appointment of state officers, saying the matter comes under the purview of the

The ruling by Acting Chief Justice Huluvadi G Ramesh and Justice RMT Teeka Raman was in contrary to the stand taken earlier by another bench which had appointed an amicus curie to frame draft rules for appointment of the officers who represent the state in various courts.

Earlier, a bench led by Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul (since elevated to the Supreme Court) had appointed senior advocates A L Somayaji and R Krishnamoorthy as the amicus curie to go into framing of the rules.

Subsequently, the draft rules were submitted by the two lawyers in the previous hearing on February 14 following which the bench had then said it would be open to the state to proceed and notify the rules, unless they have some concern.

Posting the matter for today, the bench had also said the could bring to the notice of the such concerns.

When the matter came up for hearing today, the bench led by the Acting Chief Justice in its order said the appointment of officers was purely under the domain of the state and asked how the can interfere.

Disposing of the petitions, including one by advocate V Vasanthakumar, the bench gave liberty to the state to act in accordance with the Supreme guidelines in the matter.

It further said if there was any violation of the apex guidelines, the petitioners may approach the

Vasanthakumar had alleged that it was an unwritten rule that whichever party comes to power, advocates, with leanings toward the party, were appointed as officers.

The petitioners had sought a direction to the state to appoint law-knowing persons and not political leaders as officers for different courts.

(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

image
Business Standard
177 22