By consent of both parties, this writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.
2.This writ petition has been filed by the Lawyer's Association of Madurai District Court represented by its President, for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to exempt the petitioner association from paying electricity consumption charges and to provide free electricity to the bar association by considering the petitioner's representation dated 02.02.2017 in the light of the decision of the High Court of Madyapradesh in Vinodkumar Bharatwaj Vs. State of M.P. AIR 2013 MP 145, within a stipulated time.
3.Heard Mr.E.Marees Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.R.Karthikeyan, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
4.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner association, namely, Lawyers Association of Madurai District Court, Madurai is a recognized Association by the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu with Registration No.219 on 12.11.2010 and is also registered under Section 13 of the Tamil Nadu Advocates Welfare Fund Act, 1987. Subsequently, the Hon'ble High Court also vide its proceedings dated 09.12.2010 had allotted a Hall in the second floor of the Lawyers Chambers in the campus of the District Court in favour of the petitioner association. There are thousands of members practicing actively, in the District Court and other Courts.
5.Since the Bar is part and parcel of the Judicial Wing of the State, it is the duty of the state to provide all infrastructural and other facilities to the members of the Bar. Since, the supply of electricity to the Bar Association can also be considered as a duty of the State, a representation had been given in this regard on 02.02.2017, bringing to the notice of the authorities that the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, in the case of Vinodhkumar Bharatwaj Vs. State of M.P. reported in AIR 2013 M.P. 145, accepting a similar prayer, directed the State Government to consider the request for grant of electricity service connection at free of cost to the Bar Association in the State. At this stage, it is relevant to extract Paragraph 13 of the aforementioned judgment, which reads as follows:
?13.Consequently, this Public Interest Litigation is allowed with the following directions:
(i) The Government is responsible to pay the electricity charges of the electricity consumed by the electricity appliances ie., bulbs, tube-lights and fans also coolers during summer season in the notified Bar Rooms of the District Courts and other Courts situated within the territorial jurisdiction of this Bench.
(ii) The Government is also liable to pay electricity charges of electricity appliances of the notified Bar Rooms of the High Court of M.P. Gwalior Bench.
(iii) The Government can verify the expenses in this regard from the Public Works Department and shall pay the same to the High Court as an additional allotment so the High Court can provide free electricity charges to the notified Bar Rooms of the Bar Associations. We are not fixing any time limit to carry out these directions because the matter is under active consideration before the Government. We hope that the Government shall take a decision in this regard within reasonable time.
(iv) It is further clarified that these directions would be applicable to the Courts which are within the territorial jurisdiction of Gwalior Bench and to the High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench Gwalior.
No order as to costs.?
6.Again referring to the G.O.Ms.No.1725, Home (Courts III) Department dated 23.07.1981, issued in favour of the Madras Bar Association, in which the payment of charges relating to the rent and their maintenance in addition to exemption from Electricity Consumption charges submitted that similar exemption can be granted since the members of the petitioner association had to shell out huge sum of money towards electricity charges, it hugely affects the economic strength of the Association whose members are regularly and sincerely practicing in the District Courts and High Court Bench at Madurai. If exemption as prayed for is granted, the said sum can be used for constructive purposes of the Association and for the welfare of the Lawyers. Adding further, it is stated that when the State Government had extended the benefit of exemption from payment of electricity charges to other Bar Associations in the State, the petitioner Association, which is also similarly placed, deserves extension of a similar benefit. Hence, a representation dated 02.02.2017 seeking exemption from payment of electricity charges and provide free electricity was made to the respondents. Despite receipt of the same, the respondents have not come forward to make a positive response. Therefore, finding no effective and efficacious alternative remedy, the petitioner has come to this Court with the present writ petition. Hence, the same may be allowed as prayed for.
7.The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Electricity Board submitted that the representation dated 02.02.2017 given by the petitioner association can be directed to be considered by the State as directed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the aforementioned judgment and if any order is passed by the State Government, the same would be complied with.
8.The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent also submitted that since the petitioner's representation dated 02.02.2017 is pending consideration, the Government will look into the same in the light of the decision of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of Vinodhkumar Bharatwaj Vs. State of M.P. reported in AIR 2013 M.P. 145, as per the facts and rules in force.
9.Legal profession is part and parcel of administration of justice and the Advocates are the officers of the Court. Hence, it is obligatory and mandatory for the State to provide free electricity to the Bar rooms situated in the court premises and it is necessary to protect the aforesaid rights of the Advocate, namely, Bar Association in Principle and it should not be left on the mercy of the State Government. While considering a similar issue the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, in its judgment dated 24.01.2013, in the case of Vinodhkumar Bharatwaj, cited supra, has held as follows:
?6)It is well settled principle of law from century that the advocates are officers of the Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lalit Mohan Das Vs. The Advocate General, Orissa and another, AIR 1957 SC 250 has held as under:
? A member of the Bar undoubtedly owes a duty to his client and must place before the Court all that can fairly and reasonable be submitted on behalf of his client. He may even submit that a particular order is not correct and may ask for a review of that order. At the same time, a member of the Bar is an officer of the Court an owes a duty to the Court in which he is appearing. He must uphold the dignity and decorum of the Court and must not do anything to bring the Court itself into disrepute.?
7)The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of O.P. Sharma and others Vs. High Court of Punjab and Haryana, (2011) 6 SCC 86 has held as under in regard to right and status of lawyers and duty of the advocates:
?The role and status of lawyers at the beginning of sovereign and democratic India is accounted as extremely vital in deciding that the nation's administration was to be governed by the rule of law. They were considered intellectuals amongst the elites of the country and social activists amongst the downtrodden. The role of lawyers in the framing of the Constitution needs no special mention. In a profession with such a vivid history it is regretful, to say the least, to witness instances of the nature of the present kind. Lawyers are the officers of the court in the administration of justice. The Bench as well as the Bar has to avoid unwarranted situations or trivial issues that hamper the cause of justice and are in no one's interest. A lawyer cannot be a mere mouthpiece of his client and cannot associate himself with his client in maligning the reputation of a judicial officer merely because his client failed to secure the desired order from the said officer. A deliberate attempt to scandalise the court which would shake the confidence of the litigating public in the system and would cause a very serious damage to the name of the judiciary. An advocate's duty is an important as that of Judge. Advocates have a large responsibility towards the society. A client's relationship with his / her advocate is underlined by utmost trust. An advocate is expected to act with utmost sincerity and respect. In all professional functions, an advocate should be diligent and his conduct should also be diligent and should conform to the requirements of the law by which an advocate plays a vital role in the preservation of society and justice system. An advocate is under an obligation to uphold the rule of law and ensure that the public justice system is enabled to function at its full potential. Any violation of the principles of professional ethics by an advocate is unfortunate and unacceptable. Ignoring even a minor violation / misconduct militates against the fundamental foundation of the public justice system. An advocate should be dignified in his dealings to the court, to his fellow lawyers and to the litigants. He should have integrity in abundance and should never do anything that erodes his credibility. An advocate has a duty to enlighten and encourage the juniors in the profession. An ideal advocate should believe that the legal profession has an element of service also and associates with legal service activities. Most importantly, he should faithfully abide by the standards of professional conduct and etiquette prescribed by the Bar Council of India in Chapter II, Part VI of the Bar Council of India Rules. As a rule, an advocate being a member of the legal profession has a social duty to show the people a beacon of light by his conduct and actions rather than being adamant on an unwarranted and uncalled for issue?
It is clearly mentioned in the aforesaid judgment that the lawyers are the officers of the Court in the administration of justice.
8)The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Supreme Court of Bar Association and others v. B.D.Kaushik, (2011) 13 SCC 774 has observed as under to the effect that the Supreme Court is providing numbers of facilities to the advocates practising in the Supreme Court:
?80.This Court has considered the request made by the learned counsel appearing in the matter to give appropriate directions / guidelines for effective implementation of ?One-Bar-One-Vote? principle enunciated by the amended Rule. It is a matter of common knowledge that this Court has provided four huge libraries, three canteens, two lounges, several rooms to be used as consultation rooms where learned advocates regularly practising in this Court can consult with their clients, arbitration rooms, advocates' chambers, huge parking places, free use of electricity supply, etc., to the members of SCBA. It is not in dispute that there are about ten thousand members of SCBA at present though the actual number of advocates / practitioners, who are regularly practising in this Court is not more than two thousand five hundred out of which there are about nine hundred Advocates-on-Record.
9)The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sudha Vs. President Advocates Associations, Chennai and others; (2010) 14 SCC 114 has held as under about the legal profession:
?40.The legal profession is a solemn and serious occupation. It is a noble calling and all those who belong to it are its honourable members. Although the entry to the profession can be had by acquiring merely the qualification prescribed by different universities, the honour as a professional has to be maintained by its members by their exemplary conduct both in and outside the court. The legal profession is different from other professions in that what the lawyers do, affects not only an individual but the administration of justice which is the foundation of the civilised society. Both as a leading member of the intelligentsia of the society and as an intelligent citizen, the lawyer has to conduct himself as a model for others both in his professional and in his private and public life. The different Associations of the members of the Bar are being formed to show the strength of lawyers in case of necessity. The lawyer while exercising vote in an election of office-bearers of the Association must conduct himself in an exemplary manner. Those who are concerned about the high standard of the profession are supposed to take appropriate action to see that the election takes place peacefully and in an organized manner.?
It is clear from the aforesaid judgment that the legal profession has an effective and direct association with the administration of justice.?
10.Since, the Government of Tamil Nadu had already issued G.O.Ms.No.1725, Home (Courts III) Department dated 23.07.1981, in favour of the Madras Bar Association, granting exemption with certain conditions that exemption will be withdrawn as and when the Association occupies any separate buildings of its own or any private buildings and maintain it, the first respondent shall consider the representation of the petitioner association dated 02.02.2017 on merits within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
11.Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.
To
1.The Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu, Home (Courts III) Department, Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai.
2.The Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., TANGEDCO, Rep. by its Managing Director, Chennai.
3.The Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO, Madurai Region, Madurai.
.