The Allahabad High Court has formally requested the Uttar Pradesh government to clarify a critical legal boundary: can lawyers paid by the state to defend it also represent private citizens in lawsuits filed against the government?
Justice Saurabh Lavania of the High Court’s Lucknow bench raised the question during a hearing for a contempt petition. The court is now seeking a definitive response from the state’s Legal Remembrancer on whether Additional Government Advocates (AGAs) or standing counsel who receive a retainership from the state are permitted to institute proceedings against government authorities or their officers.
The issue surfaced during a case brought by Ashok Kumar Singh and 28 other petitioners. The group alleges that government officials committed “wilful disobedience” regarding a court order issued in 2025.
During the proceedings, the bench observed that the advocate representing the petitioners, Sudhir Kumar Mishra, is currently serving as an Additional Government Advocate. This dual role—acting as a state prosecutor while simultaneously representing private parties against the state—prompted the bench to scrutinize the rules governing state retainership.
The court’s inquiry centers on the specific terms of the retainership and whether it creates a conflict of interest that should bar AGAs from taking up cases adverse to the state’s interests.
By involving the Legal Remembrancer—the state’s top legal advisory officer—the court aims to establish a clear precedent for how government-contracted lawyers must manage their private practices.
The Uttar Pradesh government has been tasked with providing a formal response to these concerns. The High Court has scheduled the matter for a follow-up hearing on May 18, where the state’s clarification is expected to be reviewed.
