A writ petition has been filed by Adv Yogesh Soni before the Madhya Pradesh High Court challenging the recent list of Government Advocate appointments issued by the Office of the Advocate General, alleging that the entire selection process is arbitrary, opaque, and vitiated by favouritism.

The petitioner contends that the Advocate General’s Office has projected “years of practice” as the sole and decisive criterion for appointment, without disclosing any objective parameters or comparative evaluation. According to the petition, such an approach is contrary to settled principles governing public appointments and violates the constitutional mandate of fairness and equality.

It has been further alleged that the impugned list has been issued in blatant violation of the Gazette Notification of 2013, which prescribes the eligibility conditions and procedure for appointment of Government Advocates in the State. The petition asserts that the mandatory norms under the said notification have been ignored without recording any reasons.

The plea also highlights that although applications were invited through prescribed forms, the Advocate General’s Office has failed to disclose how the applications were scrutinised, assessed, or shortlisted. No information has been made public regarding the criteria adopted, weightage assigned, or the decision-making process, thereby rendering the selection process non-transparent and legally unsustainable.

The petition seeks quashing of the impugned list of appointments and a direction to conduct the selection afresh in accordance with law and the 2013 Gazette Notification.