Lucknow Bench lays down need assessment and transparent merit criteria for appointing Uttar Pradesh State Law Officers

13 October 2026

The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court, comprising Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Justice Rajeev Bharti, disposed of three connected petitions in Mahendra Singh Pawar v. State of Uttar Pradesh with a set of guidelines on engaging State Law Officers.
The judgment carries the neutral citation 2026:AHC-LKO:72290-DB.
The State must first assess, realistically, how many State Law Officers it needs, and must prescribe objective, transparent, merit-based criteria covering experience, competence, integrity, behaviour and suitability.
No person with criminal antecedents or undesirable behaviour may be appointed, and the State must ensure adequate representation of women advocates, subject to availability.
A State Law Officer appearing for a private party against the State must obtain a no-objection certificate from the competent authority and annex it to the vakalatnama; the Court clarified that this restriction does not apply to Brief Holders.
The Bench noted that Paragraph 5.01 of the Legal Remembrancer's Manual contemplates one Chief Standing Counsel for Allahabad and one for Lucknow, and found no explanation for six such appointments.
The Court clarified that its observations do not disturb existing appointments.