Punjab Advocate-General Baldev Singh quits

Chandigarh, October 9
Refusing to “succumb to pressure”, Advocate-General Baldev Singh today put in his papers. He is expected to be replaced by Punjab and Haryana High Court’s senior advocate Ashok Aggarwal.
Available information suggests that Baldev Singh resigned on the question of principles regarding the issue of representing the Punjab State Electricity Board.
The board is to be represented by the Advocate-General. But for several years now it was being represented by an Additional Advocate-General.
On September 23, a notification was issued appointing Baldev Singh as senior standing counsel for the board cases, a move that did not go down well with his detractors.
Indications are that Baldev Singh was under “tremendous pressure” to hand over the cases to an Additional Advocate-General ever since the notification was issued.
It is believed that Principal Secretary to Chief Minister DS Guru’s visit to Baldev Singh’s house this afternoon preceded the resignation. Indications are that Guru had suggested that the cases be handed over to an Additional Advocate-General.
Baldev Singh is the second Advocate-General appointed by the SAD Government to have resigned on principles. On October 5, 1998, GS Grewal had resigned from the post after levelling serious allegations against the Punjab Government. Grewal had opposed the state government’s move to defend its "corrupt" and "guilty" bureaucrats on state expenses, which offended a section of the bureaucracy. A renowned criminal lawyer, Baldev Singh was reportedly recommended for elevation as a High Court Judge more than a decade ago. But he did not agree to it. During his short tenure of four months in office, Baldev Singh initiated a slew of measures to streamline the functioning of the office.
On Baldev Singh’s missive, the state govt had recently circulated instructions to all heads of departments, Divisional Commissioners and Deputy Commissioners. In a communication to the Chief Secretary, Baldev Singh had warned that the Judges “may be constrained to require personal appearances of senior officers in court”, if the “situation doesn’t improve and the depts concerned do not properly assist the law officers”.