PRAYAGRAJ, March 14 -- The Allahabad high court has directed the Uttar Pradesh government as well as the advocate general to apprise it of the steps taken to expedite the recruitment process in respect of vacancies in the office of government advocate in the high court. The high court directed that a proper affidavit be filed in the matter by the secretary concerned of the state government by the next date fixed, failing which the court will be compelled to take serious view of the matter. A division bench comprising Justice Ajit Kumar and Justice Swarupama Chaturvedi was hearing a writ petition filed by one Subedar Yadav. In its order dated February 26, the high court directed to list this case on March 16, 2026 for the next hearing. "Be it government or advocate general, if for shortage of staff or for any other inconvenience, the state law officer/additional advocate general fails in making proper arrangement of files by providing enough place and for its upkeep and resultantly the court is not able to hear the matters for want of proper assistance, it amounts to interference in the administration of justice," the court added. "The court matters must be kept on top priority for disposal and court means both Bench and Bar, and Bar would definitely include state counsel. When we want speedy and efficacious justice delivery system, then system must be in place. A system, if paralyzed for either not filling up the vacancies in time or for want of vacancies, the justice delivery system will certainly fail," the high court added. The high court passed the above observations, when, hearing the petition, it noticed that file records of state counsel are not updated. Besides, the court noticed that state counsel are not fully aware of the details to update the court only for the reason that files are not sent to them in advance. The high ranking state law officers present in the court argued that all this is attributable to shortage of Class three and Class four staff in the state law office. It was submitted by them that the recruitment process is undertaken after the state government sanctions or grants permission. "We do not know the modalities that have to be adopted either by the state government or by the advocate general, but we certainly do not appreciate the way the office of the advocate general is working. If there is any shortage of staff and the recruitment is not taking place for a long period of time, then it is either the government to be blamed or the office of the advocate general but in no circumstance the court can be forced to wait for instructions and for the proper assistance from state counsels as it amounts to interference in the administration of justice," the court said....