Shillong, Oct 16: The Shillong Bar Association and High Court of Meghalaya Bar Association have alleged that only Chief Minister Conrad Sangma is defending Advocate General Amit Kumar and not others.
The decision on Advocate General Amit Kumar is under the control of Chief Minister and it is on man’s show”, said the associations.
In response to the chief minister’s statement that AG cannot be removed overnight, Secretary of Shillong Bar Association T L Jyrwa pointed out that from meetings with ministers, it was understood that only the CM is defending the AG.
“What transpired from all meetings we had is everything is under control of the Chief Minister. When we met the Law Minister, he never showed that Amit Kumar is indispensable. When we met Deputy Chief Minister Prestone Tynsong, they showed concern but never defended Amit Kumar like what CM did,” Jyrwa said.
“When we met CM on September 16, he stated if we remove Amit Kumar there will be a vacuum in state legal affairs. That clearly sums up this is all a one man’s show,” he said.
Jyrwa referred to chief minister’s admission about the latter’s personal ties with the AG.
“In his recent press briefing, CM boldly claimed his relation with Amit Kumar goes very long, goes back when his late father was active as politician and that Amit Kumar is like a family friend. So we understand where his loyalty lies, whether towards state interest or for some other interests,” he said.
‘More powers to AG’
The associations have moved the court against the government’s new guidelines on appointment of advocates, which according to them will further empower the AG.
They filed a PIL challenging the state government’s September 16 notification implementing the Meghalaya Panel Advocate (Empanelment & Engagement) Guidelines, 2026.
“We came to kno that on September 16 itself the government notified the Meghalaya Panel Advocate Guidelines, 2026. If you go through it, it gives full power to AG to empanel, de-empanel or remove anyone from the panel. We don’t know the motive. Hence, the PIL, filed two days ago, seeks to quash the notification and to put in place a fair, transparent, merit-based procedure for empanelment of state counsels.
“We have filed a PIL challenging the notification and other empanelment notifications. Since it is sub judice we will not go into depth,” he added.
Legal remedy on RTI queries
The Association said it will first exhaust remedies under RTI clauses before moving the High Court regarding the expenditure incurred on Advocate General Amit Kumar.
The RTI query filed by the association on August 10 was rejected by the Public Information Officer citing that they are personal questions under clause 8 of RTI Act.
Following this, the association filed first appeal and the reply is awaited.
According to the association , if the appellate authority denies information, it will move the Chief Information Commissioner for remedy and the last resort will be the High Court
seeking details of government expenditure on the office of Advocate General Amit Kumar was denied.
