Supreme Court Directs Madhya Pradesh to Address Lack of Diversity in Government Lawyer Appointments
The Supreme Court of India has taken a significant step toward promoting inclusivity in the legal profession. On Tuesday, the court directed the Advocate General of Madhya Pradesh to ensure adequate representation of marginalized communities and women in the appointment of government lawyers for the state's High Court.
Historical Exclusion Revealed in Court Proceedings
During the hearing of a petition seeking reservation for Other Backward Class (OBC) advocates in government pleader appointments, startling statistics emerged. Advocate Varun Thakur, representing the petitioner, submitted that not a single advocate from the Scheduled Tribes (ST) community had ever been appointed as a government lawyer in the Madhya Pradesh High Court since India's independence.
Furthermore, representation from Scheduled Castes (SC) and OBC communities was described as "very low," with only a nominal number of SC candidates having been appointed over the decades. The gender imbalance was equally stark, with just one woman advocate appointed among over 100 government lawyers.
Judicial Concern Over Systemic Barriers
A bench comprising Justices M M Sundresh and N Kotiswar Singh expressed deep concern about these disparities. "If opportunity is not given to them, then how will they emerge?" Justice Sundresh remarked, highlighting the systemic barriers preventing qualified lawyers from marginalized backgrounds from advancing in their careers.
The court acknowledged that while it could not issue directives mandating reservation in these appointments, the issue warranted immediate attention. The bench emphasized that the concerns should be formally brought to the notice of the state's Advocate General for appropriate remedial action.
Long-Term Implications for Judicial Diversity
Advocate Thakur argued that the absence of representation in the Advocate General's office had profound long-term implications for the legal profession and judiciary. "There is no representation of the people we are representing," he stated, pointing out that government law officers often become candidates for elevation as judges.
This pipeline effect means that exclusion at the government lawyer level perpetuates lack of diversity in higher judicial positions, creating a cycle that limits opportunities for lawyers from marginalized communities to reach the bench.
State's Response and Future Implications
The lawyer representing the state of Madhya Pradesh assured the Supreme Court bench that these concerns would be promptly communicated to the Advocate General. While the court stopped short of ordering specific quotas, its directive places significant moral and professional pressure on the state government to address these historical imbalances.
This development comes amid growing national conversations about representation in India's legal and judicial systems. The Supreme Court's intervention signals increasing judicial awareness of how appointment practices at state levels can either perpetuate or break down barriers to professional advancement for lawyers from underrepresented communities.
