ADV. D. JAYESH vs STATE OF KERALA

2026:KER:16591
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
TH
FRIDAY, THE 27 DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026/8TH PHALGUNA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 16469 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
ADV.P.T.JOSEPH,
AGED 53 YEARS,
S/O P.J. THOMAS,
PUTHENPURACKAL HOUSE,
THATHAMPALLY P.O,
ALAPPUZHA,
PIN-688 013.
BY ADVS.
SHRI.B.PRAMOD
SHRI.ATHUL M.V.
SHRI.AJAY S. KOSHY
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY,
HOME DEPARTMENT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695028
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
CIVIL STATION/COLLECTORATE,
ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688001
3 THE SECRETARY,
LAW DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 2 :
4 LEGITHA D'CRUZ P.B.,
AGED 50 YEARS,
W/O. BENSON J. LAWRANCE,
KOILPARAMBIL, KUTHIRAPANTHY,
THIRUVAMPADY P.O.,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT – 688 002.
BY ADVS.
SRI.T.B.HOOD
SMT.M.ISHA
SRI.GRACIOUS KURIAKOSE, ADDL.DIRECTOR GENERAL OF
PROSECUTIONS
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 12.01.2026, ALONG WITH WP(C).16901/2025, THE
COURT ON 27.02.2026 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 3 :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
TH
FRIDAY, THE 27 DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026/8TH PHALGUNA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 16901 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
ADV.D.JAYESH,
AGED 50 YEARS,
S/O K. DEVADAS,
MANEESHA BHAVAN AVALUKKUNNU P.O,
ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688006
BY ADV.
SRI.L.RAM MOHAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY,
HOME DEPARTMENT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
CIVIL STATION/COLLECTORATE,
ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688001
3 THE SECRETARY,
LAW DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
4 LEGITHA D'CRUZ P.B.,
AGED 50 YEARS,
W/O. BENSON J. LAWRANCE,

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 4 :
KOILPARAMBIL, KUTHIRAPANTHY,
THIRUVAMPADY P.O.,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT – 688002.
BY ADVS.
SRI.T.B.HOOD
SMT.M.ISHA
SRI.GRACIOUS KURIAKOSE, ADDL.DIRECTOR GENERAL OF
PROSECUTION
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 12.01.2026, ALONG WITH WP(C).16469/2025, THE
COURT ON 27.02.2026 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 5 :
CR
N. NAGARESH, J.
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 and 16901 of 2025
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
th
Dated this the 27 day of February, 2026
J U D G M E N T
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Both these writ petitions have been filed by practicing
Lawyers challenging the selection for appointment to the post
of Government Pleader / Public Prosecutor.
2. In W.P.(C) No.16469 of 2025, the petitioner
is a Lawyer practicing in different Courts in Alappuzha District.
The petitioner has 25 years of practice. Ext.P2 notice dated
18.12.2024 was issued inviting application for the post of
Government Pleader / Public Prosecutor. As the petitioner

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 6 :
satisfies the eligibility conditions prescribed in the notice, he
submitted Ext.P3 application.
3. The petitioner states that the District Judge
did not offer any specific comment about five Lawyers who
were included in the list forwarded by the District Collector.
The District Judge made only a general observations that
those Lawyers have no expected experience in conducting
trial of Sessions Cases including murder cases and criminal
th
appeals. Finally, the 4 respondent was appointed as
Government Pleader / Public Prosecutor.
4. According to the petitioner, the selection and
th
appointment of the 4 respondent violates Rule 7 of the Kerala
Government Law Officers (Appointment and Conditions of
Service) and Conduct of Cases Rules, 1978. The selection
also violates the law laid down by this Court in the judgments
in Sanjeesh S.S. v. State of Kerala [2023 KHC 582], Aju
Mathew and others v. State of Kerala [2018 (5) KHC 770]

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 7 :
and Vinod E.R. v. State of Kerala and others [2016 (4) KHC
737] .
5. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.16901 of 2025
is an Advocate enrolled with the Bar Council of Kerala in the
th
year 2001. The additional 4 respondent was appointed as
Government Pleader / Public Prosecutor. The petitioner
th
would urge that the additional 4 respondent does not have
the knowledge and experience in the conduct of Sessions
Cases or criminal appeals.
6. The petitioner would argue that he satisfied
the eligibility condition prescribed in Section 18 of BNSS.
However, since the notice was meant for filling up the post of
Government Pleader alone, he did not respond to the same on
a belief that there would be separate recruitment drive for the
th
post of Public Prosecutor. The additional 4 respondent was
appointed as Public Prosecutor as well, which is
impermissible.

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 8 :
rd
7. The 3 respondent-District Collector filed
rd
counter affidavit in W.P.(C) No.16469 of 2025. The 3
respondent stated that the newly appointed District
Government Pleader and Public Prosecutor, Aluva is from
among the three Advocates recommended by the District and
Sessions Judge, Alappuzha.
rd
8. The 3 respondent submitted that the District
Collector, while preparing the list of Advocates for being
appointed as District Government Pleader and Public
Prosecutor had included the name of the petitioner in the list
of Advocates and the same was forwarded to the District and
Sessions Judge for consultation. The District Judge
recommended the names of only three Advocates out of eight.
The name of the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.16469 of 2025 was
rd
not recommended by the District Judge. The 3 respondent
further submitted that effective consultations with the District
and Sessions Judge were made before effecting appointment.

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 9 :
9. I have heard the learned counsel for the
petitioners in both the writ petitions, the learned Additional
Director General of Prosecution representing the Government
and the learned counsel appearing for the contesting
respondent.
10. Selection for appointment to the post of
Government Pleader / Public Prosecutor is dealt with in the
Kerala Government Law Officers (Appointment and Conditions
of Service) and Conduct of Cases Rules, 1978. Rules 7 and 8
of the Rules, 1978 read as follows:
“7. Set up in District Court Centres, Additional
District Court Centres and Sub Court Centres-
(1) There shall be one District Government
Pleader and Public Prosecutor at each District
Court Centre. There may also be such number of
Additional Government Pleaders and Additional
Public Prosecutors as may be considered
necessary by the Government at each District
Court Centre, Additional District Court Centre and
Sub Court Centre.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in
sub-rule (1) the Government may, if deemed
necessary at any time separate the offices of

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 10 :
Government Pleaders and Public Prosecutors at
any Court and make separate appointments
accordingly.
8. Method of appointment of Government Law
Officers at District Court, Additional District
Court and Sub Court Centres-
(1) Government Law Officer at a District
Court Centre, Additional District Court Centre or
Sub Court Centre shall be appointed by the
Government from a panel of names of Advocates
furnished by the District Collector concerned:
Provided that the Government shall try to
give adequate representation to members of
Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe Communities in
the matter of appointment of Government Law
Officers.
(2) For preparing the panel, the District
Collector shall follow the following procedure,
namely --
(a) A list of advocates from the roll
of advocates of the Bar Council of Kerala having at
least seven years of practice in the Bar and who
having regard to their qualification, experience,
integrity, reliability, reputation and character and
antecedents, are, in the opinion of the District
Collector, fit to be appointed as a Government Law
Officer shall be prepared and sent to the concerned
District and Sessions Judge for consultation. The
District and Sessions Judge shall return the list with
his remarks within ten clear days from the date of
receipt of the same by him:

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 11 :
Provided that in preparing the list it shall
not be necessary to advertise the vacancies or
invite applications for the appointment.
(b) After the expiry of the lime limit
mentioned in Clause (a) for return of the list from
the District and Sessions Judge the District
Collector shall prepare the panel of advocates
based on the list forwarded by him to the District
and Sessions Judge under the said clause.
(c) In preparing the panel, the
District Collector shall not include the name of any
Advocate whose name was not included in the list
prepared by him under clause (a) or whose name
was specifically disapproved by the District and
Sessions Judge on specific grounds.
(d) The character and antecedents
of all persons included in the panel shall be got
verified through the concerned Superintendent of
Police:
Provided that if members of the
Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe Communities
are qualified to be appointed as Law Officer, the
panel shall contain the name of one member from
such community.”
Rule 7(2) would indicate that the Government is empowered
to separate the offices of Government Pleaders and Public
Prosecutors at any Court and make separate appointments
accordingly.

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 12 :
11. Section 18 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 reads as follows:
“18. Public Prosecutors. -
(1) For every High Court, the Central
Government or the State Government shall, after
consultation with the High Court, appoint a Public
Prosecutor and may also appoint one or more
Additional Public Prosecutors, for conducting in such
Court, any prosecution, appeal or other proceeding
on behalf of the Central Government or the State
Government, as the case may be:
Provided that for National Capital Territory
of Delhi, the Central Government shall, after
consultation with the High Court of Delhi, appoint the
Public Prosecutor or Additional Public Prosecutors
for the purposes of this sub-section.
(2) The Central Government may appoint one
or more Public Prosecutors for the purpose of
conducting any case in any district or local area.
(3) For every district, the State Government
shall appoint a Public Prosecutor and may also
appoint one or more Additional Public Prosecutors
for the district:
Provided that the Public Prosecutor or
Additional Public Prosecutor appointed for one
district may be appointed also to be a Public
Prosecutor or an Additional Public Prosecutor, as
the case may be, for another district.
(4) The District Magistrate shall, in
consultation with the Sessions Judge, prepare a

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 13 :
panel of names of persons, who are, in his opinion
fit to be appointed as Public Prosecutors or
Additional Public Prosecutors for the district.
(5) No person shall be appointed by the State
Government as the Public Prosecutor or Additional
Public Prosecutor for the district unless his name
appears in the panel of names prepared by the
District Magistrate under subsection (4).
(6) Notwithstanding anything in sub-section
(5), where in a State there exists a regular Cadre of
Prosecuting Officers, the State Government shall
appoint a Public Prosecutor or an Additional Public
Prosecutor only from among the persons
constituting such Cadre:
Provided that where, in the opinion of the
State Government, no suitable person is available in
such Cadre for such appointment, that Government
may appoint a person as Public Prosecutor or
Additional Public Prosecutor, as the case may be,
from the panel of names prepared by the District
Magistrate under sub-section (4).
Explanation—For the purposes of this sub-section,-
(a) "regular Cadre of Prosecuting
Officers" means Cadre of Prosecuting Officers which
includes therein the post of Public Prosecutor, by
whatever name called, and which provides for
promotion of Assistant Public Prosecutors, by
whatever name called, to that post;
(b) "Prosecuting Officer" means a
person, by whatever name called, appointed to
perform the functions of a Public Prosecutor, Special

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 14 :
Public Prosecutor, Additional Public Prosecutor or
Assistant Public Prosecutor under this Sanhita.
(7) A person shall be eligible to be appointed
as a Public Prosecutor or an Additional Public
Prosecutor under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2)
or sub-section (3) or sub-section (6), only if he has
been in practice as an advocate for not less than
seven years.
(8) The Central Government or the State
Government may appoint, for the purposes of any
case or class of cases, a person who has been in
practice as an advocate for not less than ten years
as a Special Public Prosecutor:
Provided that the Court may permit the
victim to engage an advocate of his choice to assist
the prosecution under this sub-section.
(9) For the purposes of sub-section (7) and
sub-section (8), the period during which a person
has been in practice as an advocate, or has
rendered (whether before or after the
commencement of this Sanhita) service as a Public
Prosecutor or as an Additional Public Prosecutor or
Assistant Public Prosecutor or other Prosecuting
Officer, by whatever name called, shall be deemed
to be the period during which such person has been
in practice as an advocate.”
12. The question of appointment of Public
Prosecutors and the primacy to be given to the opinion of the
District Judge in the consultative process contemplated under

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 15 :
Section 18 of the BNSS, came up for consideration before a
Division Bench of this Court in Suo motu revision petition
initiated by the High Court v. State of Kerala [2025 KLT
OnLine 1731] . This Court declared that the State Government
is under mandate to give primacy to the opinion of the District
Judge in the consultative process contemplated under Section
18 of the BNSS while making appointments to the post of
Public Prosecutor under Section 18(3) of the BNSS.
13. The notice dated 18.12.2024 for appointment
as District Government Pleader, Alappuzha is seen published
under the Kerala Government Law Officers (Appointment and
Conditions of Service) and Conduct of Cases Rules, 1978.
The Rules, 1978 are framed by the State of Kerala under the
Kerala Public Services Act, 1968 to govern the appointment
and conditions of service of Government Officers. The Rules,
1978 therefore will apply only to the Government Law Officers
who hold a public post in public service of the State.

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 16 :
14. The question whether the Rules, 1978
framed in relation to “public post” under the Act, 1968 are
applicable to the Public Prosecutors to be appointed under the
BNSS was considered by the Division Bench. The Division
Bench held that even assuming that the Rules, 1978 are
traceable to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, that would
pertain only to public service. This Court held that since
Public Prosecutors do not hold public post, the Rules, 1978 in
so far as they relate to Public Prosecutors would have no
application to them.
15. If that be so, appointment of Public
Prosecutors will be governed by Section 24 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, and now by Section 18 of the BNSS.
Appointments of Public Prosecutors therefore has to be made
following the consultative process prescribed by Section 18.
The age old tradition on the part of the State in appointing the
District Government Counsel on the basis of the

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 17 :
recommendations of the District Collector in consultation with
the District Judge is based on certain principles. The District
Judge is supposed to know the merit, competency and
capability of the concerned Lawyers for discharging their
duties. The District Magistrate is supposed to know their
conduct outside the court vis-a-vis the victims of offence,
public officers, witnesses, etc. The District Magistrate is also
supposed to know about the conduct of the Government
Counsel as also their integrity.
16. In W.P.(C) No.16469 of 2025, the petitioner
is challenging the legality of the consultative process. The
petitioner argues that the District Judge weeded out
candidates including the petitioner from the list and sent the
names of only three Lawyers to the District Collector and the
District Collector, in turn, sent the panel of those three
Lawyers to the State Government for making appointment.
The petitioner would allege that the District Judge has only

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 18 :
made general observation in respect of those Lawyers who
are excluded.
17. The pleadings in the writ petitions would
indicate that the District Magistrate had forwarded the list of
candidates which contained the names of eight Advocates.
The District Judge called for report/opinion from Sessions
Judges of the District with respect to the eight Advocates
regarding their experience in the respective field of law,
approach, performance and behaviour in the Court in
conducting the cases. The Principal District and Sessions
Judge scrutinised the credentials of each Advocate and
interacted with them separately. It is after analysing all the
materials available, including the reports of the Sessions
Judges and after interaction with each candidates, that the
Principal District and Sessions Judge sent the names of three
Advocates included in the panel. While sending the panel to
the District Collector, the District and Sessions Judge has

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 19 :
categorically stated that the remaining five candidates have no
expected experience in conducting trial of serious Sessions
Cases including murder cases and appeal matters to appoint
them as District Government Pleader and Public Prosecutor.
Therefore, it is evident that the District and Sessions Judge
has applied his mind with reference to relevant materials
gathered, during the consultative process. I therefore do not
find any illegality or irregularity in the consultative process.
18. At the same time, the petitioner in W.P.(C)
No.16901 of 2025, who has not applied for the post of
Government Pleader / Public Prosecutor, points out that the
public notice dated 18.12.2024 of the District Collector was for
appointment to the post of Government Pleader alone. As the
petitioner had more experience in criminal law practice, the
petitioner was expecting a separate notice for appointment as
Public Prosecutor. After inviting application for appointment
as District Government Pleader, respondents 1 to 3 have

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 20 :
made appointment to the post of District Government Pleader
and Public Prosecutor, which is illegal.
19. Respondents 1 to 3 would meet the said
argument stating that the post of Government Pleader and
Public Prosecutor is one integrated post and in the notice
dated 18.12.2024, the post of District Government Pleader
and Public Prosecutor was referred to. Therefore, there was
no lack of clarity or confusion in the notification dated
18.12.2024. The argument of the petitioner that he did not
apply for the post as the selection was purportedly for
appointment of District Government Pleader alone, is
unsustainable.
20. In this regard, one should keep in mind that
Rule 7 of the Rules, 1978 enables the Government to
separate the offices of Government Pleaders and Public
Prosecutors at any Court and make separate appointments
accordingly. Therefore, if the public notice is for appointment

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 21 :
to the post of District Government Pleader, one will be justified
in assuming that the Government will come up with another
notification for appointment to the post of Public Prosecutor.
21. The notice dated 18.12.2024 was issued
inviting application for appointment of District Government
Pleaders. The notice indicated that applications are invited as
stipulated under Rule 8 of the Rules, 1978. If the notice is for
appointment as District Government Pleader alone, the panel
of Advocates could not have been prepared for appointment to
the post of Public Prosecutor.
22. True, there was a reference to the post of
Public Prosecutor in the “subject” part of the notice. But, in
the notice, only the post of District Government Pleader was
mentioned. A reading of the notice does not indicate that the
appointment was intended to the post of District Government
Pleader and Public Prosecutor. Therefore, the notice cannot
be treated as one calling applications for the post of Public

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 22 :
Prosecutor.
23. The omission in the notice dated 18.12.2024
cannot be condoned because persons like the petitioners
might have refrained from applying for the post on the belief
that the notice was only for appointment to the post of District
Government Pleader. Therefore, even though there is due
consultative process in selection, eligible Lawyers have been
excluded from consideration as they could not apply for
appointment as District Government Pleader and Public
Prosecutor.
24. In the circumstances, the entire selection
process and appointment to the post of District Government
Pleader and Public Prosecutor, Alappuzha pursuant to the
notification dated 18.12.2024 is set aside. The respondents
are directed to issue fresh notice/notification for appointment
to the post of District Government Pleader and Public
Prosecutor and make appointment after considering all eligible

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 23 :
candidates who apply for the post. In the facts of the case, it
is directed that the present incumbent appointed pursuant to
the notice dated 18.12.2024 shall be permitted to continue as
District Government Pleader and Public Prosecutor till a fresh
selection and appointment is made.
The writ petitions are disposed of as above.
Sd/-
N. NAGARESH, JUDGE
aks/24.02.2026

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 24 :
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 16469 OF 2025
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P-1 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF
PRACTICE DATED 26.12.2022 ISSUED TO
THE PETITIONER FROM THE BAR COUNCIL OF
KERALA
Exhibit P-2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED
18.12.2024 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT DISTRICT COLLECTOR
Exhibit P-3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
08.01.2025 ALONG WITH BIO-DATA
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND
RESPONDENT DISTRICT COLLECTOR
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:
Exhibit R3(a) Copy of the G.O.(Ms) No. 49/2025/Law
dated 12.06.2025
Exhibit R3(b) Copy of the Letter No.DCALP/9911/2024-
SC3 from District Collector, Alappuzha
dated 25.03.2025 along with panel
Exhibit R3(c) Copy of the panel prepared by the
Principal District and Sessions Judge,
dated 20.03.2025
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P-4 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED
20.03.2025 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT
JUDGE, ALAPPUZHA TO THE DISTRICT
COLLECTOR, ALAPPUZHA ALONG WITH A
PENAL OF THREE LAWYERS INCLUDING THE
ADDL. 4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P-5 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED
25.03.2025 ISSUED BY THE TO THE
DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ALAPPUZHA TO THE
LAW SECRETARY

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 25 :
Exhibit P-6 A TRUE COPY OF G.O ( MS) NO.
49/2025 /LAW DATED 12.06.2025 ISSUED
BY THE ADDL. 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P-7 A TRUE COPY OF THE PRINTOUT OF THE
WHATSAPP MESSAGE CONTAINING THE
DECISIONS TAKEN BY THE DISTRICT
COMMITTEE OF AILU CONVENED ON
04.07.2025 WHICH WAS FORWARDED TO ME
Exhibit P-8 A TRUE COPY OF THE PRINTOUT OF THE
WHATSAPP MESSAGE CONTAINING THE
DECISIONS TAKEN BY THE DISTRICT
COMMITTEE OF AILU CONVENED ON
18.09.2025 AT HARIPPAD WHICH WAS
FORWARDED TO ME.

2026:KER:16591
W.P.(C) Nos.16469 & 16901/2025
: 26 :
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 16901 OF 2025
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P-1 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF
ENROLLMENT DATED 26.12.2022 ISSUED TO
THE PETITIONER FROM THE BAR COUNCIL OF
KERALA
Exhibit P-2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED
18.12.2024 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT DISTRICT COLLECTOR
Exhibit P-3 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED
20.03.2025 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT
JUDGE, ALAPPUZHA TO THE DISTRICT
COLLECTOR, ALAPPUZHA ALONG WITH A
PENAL OF THREE LAWYERS INCLUDING THE
ADDL. 4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P-4 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED
25.03.2025 ISSUED BY THE TO THE
DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ALAPPUZHA TO THE
LAW SECRETARY
Exhibit P-5 A TRUE COPY OF G.O ( MS) NO.
49/2025 /LAW DATED 12.06.2025 ISSUED
BY THE ADDL. 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit P-6 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED
01.08.2025 ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.