A comparison of the three top government law officers in India, distinguishing their constitutional or statutory basis, level and qualifications.
- The Attorney General (Article 76) is the only law officer named in the Constitution; he is the highest law officer of the Union, appointed by the President, qualified to be a Supreme Court judge.
- The Solicitor General is a statutory office (with Additional Solicitors General below him); he assists the Attorney General but is not mentioned in the Constitution.
- The Advocate General (Article 165) is the highest law officer of a State, appointed by the Governor, qualified to be a High Court judge.
- Only the Attorney General and the Advocate General have the right to participate in legislative proceedings (Parliament and State Legislature respectively) without a vote; the Solicitor General does not.
- The Attorney General and Advocate General hold office during the pleasure of the President and the Governor respectively.
The "which office is constitutional" trap (only the Attorney General and Advocate General are; the Solicitor General is statutory) is a classic objective question.
The Solicitor General is statutory, not constitutional; the Advocate General is a State office (Art 165), not a junior to the Attorney General; the Attorney General is qualified like a Supreme Court judge, the Advocate General like a High Court judge.
Attorney General (Art 76, Union, SC-judge qualification) and Advocate General (Art 165, State, HC-judge qualification) are constitutional; the Solicitor General is statutory.