The Kerala High Court ruled that the appointment of public prosecutors and government pleaders is at the discretion of the government, and there is no statutory right to reservation in such roles.

Two separate writ petitions were filed before the Court. Both petitioners sought the application of PwD reservation to the appointment of public prosecutors.

A Bench of Justice D.K. Singh observed, "The 4% reservation (under the RPwD Act, 2016) is against the vacancies in a cadre. The appointment of the Government Pleader and Public Prosecutor is not an appointment in a service which has a cadre strength, and there are no vacancies against which the reservation of 4% under Section 34 of the Act of 2016 can be made applicable,"

The Court added, "Even otherwise, the appointment of the Advocates as Government Pleader or Public Prosecutor is fiat of the Government which is a client before the Court and the Government is entitled to appoint the best of the Advocates as Government Pleader and Public Prosecutor to defend its cases. No one has the right to be appointed as Government Pleader and Public Prosecutor,"

The Court’s ruling cited Section 34 of the RPwD Act, which mandates that government establishments reserve 4% of their vacancies for individuals with benchmark disabilities. This provision aims to improve employment opportunities for people with disabilities in government jobs. However, the Court explained that the reservation requirement does not extend to non-cadre-based positions like public prosecutors and government pleaders.

The Court agreed with the government's position, referencing the Supreme Court’s decision in State of UP & Ors v UP State Law Officers Association, which acknowledged that appointments for government pleaders and public prosecutors are contractual, not service-based. Additionally, the Court pointed to the Kerala Government Law Officers (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1976, which govern these appointments but do not include provisions for reservations.

In conclusion, the Court dismissed both writ petitions, affirming that no statutory right to reservation exists for individuals with benchmark disabilities in the appointment of public prosecutors or government pleaders.

Cause Title: Shinu K.R. & Anr. v. The State of Kerala & Ors., [2025:KER:10773]

Appearance:

Petitioners: Advocates NN Sasi and Harishankar S, Manu Ramachandran, M Kiranlal, R Rajesh, Sameer M Nair, Geethu Krishnan, and Sailakshmi Menon.

Respondents: Senior Advocate Bimal K Nath

Click here to read/download Order


Kerala High CourtJustice DK Singh

Suchita Shukla

Assistant Editor

Suchita Shukla is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum, with a strong foundation in legal research and writing, she brings over 4.5 years of experience to the table, having honed her skills in the dynamic field of law. She covers Supreme Court and High Courts. She completed her BA-LLB (Hons.) 5-year course with specialisation in Intellectual Property rights from Galgotias University. Since 2019, apart from having worked at a legal publishing house she has also ventured into legal journalism.