The correct answer is option 4. This statement is not correct because the Attorney-General of India is not a whole-time counsel for the government. The Attorney-General is primarily appointed to provide legal advice to the government and represent the government in legal matters. However, this position is not a full-time one, and the Attorney-General is allowed to engage in private practice as an advocate.

Let`s analyze the other options to understand why they are correct:

Option 1 is correct. The Attorney-General of India has the right to speak in the Houses of Parliament, although he doesn`t have a voting right. This allows him to provide legal insights and opinions on various matters.

Option 2 is correct. The Attorney-General has the right of audience in all courts in India, which means he can represent the government and present arguments on behalf of the state in any court within the territory of India.

Option 3 is correct. The Attorney-General of India must have the same qualifications as required to be a judge of the Supreme Court. This ensures that the individual appointed as the Attorney-General possesses the necessary qualifications and experience in the field of law.

In conclusion, the incorrect statement is option 4 because the Attorney-General of India is not a whole-time counsel for the government.