SC: Nothing wrong if AG appears for private parties

Kerala-based NGO ‘Centre for Consumer Education’ has stated that the AG’s appearance for private parties is a direct conflict of interest since he is the face of the government in the apex court.

By: Express News Service | New Delhi | Updated: October 2, 2015 2:59 am
Supreme Court, Attorney General of India, AGI, private parties, AGI private parties, india news Rohatgi with CJI Dattu. Express Archive

The Supreme Court said on Thursday that there is nothing wrong if the Attorney General of India appears for private parties in cases where no conflict of interest is involved.

“As long as there is no conflict of interest, there is no issue. We may address him as learned Attorney General even when he is appearing for private parties but that does not mean he is considered as the law officer of the government. No, we cannot intervene in the matter and issue any orders,” said a bench of Chief Justice H L Dattu and Justice Amitava Roy.

Share This Article
Share
Related Article

The bench made these observations as it dismissed a PIL, which sought directive to the Centre to stop giving permission to Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi to appear for private parties in cases against government. It also rejected the plea for referring the issue to a constitution bench to decide if senior government law officers can be allowed to appear against government.

Kerala-based NGO ‘Centre for Consumer Education’ has stated that the AG’s appearance for private parties is a direct conflict of interest since he is the face of the government in the apex court.

Questions were raised after Rohatgi represented four-star bar owners of Kerala in their appeal against state government’s liquor policy, which restricted bar licences only to five-star hotels. Rohatgi, while speaking to journalists, had defended the decision, saying he had secured the requisite permission from the Centre and added there was no conflict of interest as central government was not a party.

For all the latest India News, download Indian Express App

  1. G
    Gaurav Jain
    Oct 5, 2015 at 2:11 am
    To best of my knowledge and belief I mailed to all these Attorney Generals a few months back to get advice on a matter of a lady aged 66 yrs who is bound to face the injustices due to the persisting corruption in Delhi, but none of them responded. And it is in a row that the Guardian of the Indian Consution "SUPREME COURT OF INDIA" has started delivering the judgements that are not easy to digest. In a recent PIL filed by Tapesh Bagati, was rejected by the SC. In this PIL the peioner requested the Apex Court to intervene between Centre and the Delhi Delhi Government as the people of Delhi's SItuation is becoming bad to worse due to the Dengue disastor, and due to their tussle the work in direction is not going all the right way. But the court stated that it cannot intervene and the public will teach lesson in this regard at the time of the elections. How insensitive judgement? This means that the court is so weak that it cannot intervene and adviced the peioner that public should suffer for few years till the next elections in Delhi will take place and thus also forcing the Delhi people to rub their noses on floor, for selecting the Government at Delhi. Don't you think that the days of the Independent Judiciary are very near to come? Has the Apex Court Judiciary also come under some influences? If yes, then is it a matter of great concern or not? Think over and over again and again till you reach to the conclusion. All for the social cause. Any body can call me up at my mail at in this regard only.
    (0)(0)
    Reply
    1. V
      vijay
      Oct 3, 2015 at 10:29 am
      Absolutely wrong judgement.... the very fact that AG stand against GOVT should be taken as conflict of interest and corrupt practice....AG should resign if he is fond of appearing against GOVT.
      (0)(0)
      Reply
      1. V
        vijay
        Oct 3, 2015 at 10:31 am
        if AG do not resign then GOVT should sack him and if that does not happen then judiciary must act and can not resile....
        (0)(0)
        Reply