HC questions states hiring of advocates
HC questions states hiring of advocates
KOCHI: The Kerala High Court on Monday observed that bringing of lawyers from outside for conducting the government cases amounted..

KOCHI: The Kerala High Court on Monday observed that bringing of lawyers from outside for conducting the government cases amounted to plundering of the state exchequer.

A Division Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice C N Ramachndran Nair and Justice P S Gopinathan made the oral remarks while considering a petition filed by Kolakkadan Moosa Haji, who approached the court seeking legal action against Opposition leader V S Achuthanandan, for allegedly filing false information in a petition seeking a CBI inquiry into the new revelations in the Ice-cream parlour sex scandal case.

Moosa Haji submitted that payments amounting to `16 lakh was pending towards two Supreme Court advocates, as remuneration for providing legal advice in connection with the above mentioned case.

“V S Achuthanandan, the then Chief Minister, in order to unleash vengeance against his political opponents had sought legal opinion from his private lawyers. Without any request from the investigating officer from the home department, Achuthanandan had sought legal opinion in the Ice Cream case and thereby caused a liability of `16 lakhs to the state exchequer. Achuthanandan should be held liable,” petitioner submitted.

“When the services of efficient legal practitioners, including the Advocate-General, were easily available to the state, there was no need to seek advice from other sources. Seeking advice from outside amounted to insulting the government appointed legal officers. The government should respect and trust officials they appoint,” the court said.

The court asked what prompted the Government to seek advice from outside. “Does it mean that Government had no faith in the then Advocate General?” court asked.

The court further asked whether the government had any plans to pay the debt of `16 lakhs. At this juncture Advocate General K P Dandapani told the court that the present UDF government had not sought advice from private lawyers and also had no plans to seek any advice in the future.

The petitioner alleged that Achuthanandan had abused his powers as a Chief Minister and had allegedly procured a confession from K A Rauf in connection with the Ice cream case.

What's your reaction?

Comments

https://tupko.com/assets/images/user-avatar-s.jpg

0 comment

Write the first comment for this!