Delhi High Court
Abul Hassan And National Legal Services ... vs Delhi Vidyut Board & Ors. on 15 January, 1999
Equivalent citations: 1999IIAD(DELHI)105, AIR1999DELHI88, 77(1999)DLT640, 1999(48)DRJ483, AIR 1999 DELHI 88, (1999) 48 DRJ 483, (1999) 77 DLT 640, (1999) 2 RECCIVR 291
ORDER
Anil Dev Singh, J.
1. The original petitioner, Shri Abdul Hassan, filed the instant petition for restoration of electricity at his premises which was disconnected by the Delhi Vidyut Board (for short "DVB") on account of nonpayment of the bill amounting to Rs.7,06,992.05 raised by the DVB against him. The action of the DVB has been challenged as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unfair and unreasonable. Similar challenges as raised by the original petitioner are raised every now and then by scores of litigants. The grievances of the citizens are not only confined to the DVB but are also directed against State agencies like, Delhi Development Authority, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, New Delhi Municipal Committee, Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited, General Insurance Corporation of India and other bodies. Besides, the State and its various departments and instrumentalities are parties in a very large number of cases. Because of the ever increasing number of cases the court system is under great pressure. Therefore, if there was at the threshold a permanent mechanism or machinery to settle the matters at a pretrial stage, many matters would not find their way to the courts. Similarly, if there was a permanent forum to which pending matters could be referred by the courts for settlement, the load of cases could be taken off the courts. In order to reduce the heavy demand on court time, cases must be resolved by resorting to alternative dispute resolution methods before they enter the portals of court and even after they have so entered. One such alternative dispute resolution system which has shown encouraging results is the system of Lok Adalats. As per the statistical information, available from July 1998 issue of 'Nyaydeep', approximately 22,452 Lok Adalats were organized all over the country till March 31, 1998. In these Lok Adalats about 66,28,270 cases were disposed of. In view of the great potential of Lok Adalats in finding solutions by settlement the Parliament by enacting the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 (for short 'the Act') has conferred legitimization and recognition to the Lok Adalat system. It seems to me that since the State and its instrumentalities have the largest number of cases instituted by and against them in various level of courts, permanent Lok Adalats ought to be established in each of the departments or group of departments of the State and its instrumentalities where serving or retired judicial officers could man the Lok Adalats for quick disposal of matters by reconciliation. With this in view, on October 13, 1998 court notices were directed to be issued to the National Legal Services Authority (for short 'the NALSA') and the Delhi State Legal Services Authority. It is heartening to note that on October 15, 1998 the Member Secretary, Delhi State Legal Services Authority and the learned counsel for the DVB, on instructions, readily agreed to abide by the directions for establishing a permanent Lok Adalat for dealing with the cases in which DVB is a party. On October 28, 1998 notices were also directed to be issued to the DDA, MCD, MTNL and GIC in order to elicit their views with regard to the setting up of permanent Lok Adalats for resolution of the cases in which they are parties in the various Courts. On the said date, only the State Legal Services Authority and Delhi Administration were present. On November 5, 1998 fresh notices were directed to be issued to the absentee notices. On December 8, 1998 learned senior counsel for the NALSA, learned counsel for the Delhi State Legal Services Authority, and learned counsel for other notices were heard with regard to the question of setting up and establishing permanent Lok Adalats. While Mr. Arun Jaitley, learned senior counsel for the NALSA, came out in support of the view favouring setting up of the Lok Adalats for DVB, MCD, NDMC, DDA, GIC, MTNL and various departments of the Government, Mr.V.K.Sharma, learned counsel for the D.D.A., and Mr. Arjan K. Sikri, learned senior counsel for the M.T.N.L., did not react favourably to the idea of setting up permanent Lok Adalats under 'the Act'.
There cannot be two opinions that there is a litigation explosion. Courts are clogged with cases. There is a serious problem of overcrowding of dockets. Seekers of justice are in millions and it is becoming rather difficult for the Courts to cope up with the ever increasing cases with the present infrastructure and manpower. There is need for decentralisation of justice. Two years hence we will be in the next millennium but we are still trying to cope up with the gigantic mass of cases. We have inherited a colonial legal system. It is of Victorian era which must undergo a metamorphosis to fit in with the changing times. If innovative approaches for dispute resolution are not resorted to, the justice delivery system will crumble under the weight of Court cases.
2. Article 39A of the Constitution of India provides for equal justice and free legal aid. It states as under: "The State shall secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice, on a basis of equal opportunity, and shall, in particular, provide free legal aid, by suitable legislation or schemes or in any other way, to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities."
3. Thus it is clear that the State has been ordained to secure a legal system which promotes justice on the basis of equal opportunity. The language of Article 39A is couched in mandatory terms. This is made more than clear by the use of the twice occuring word "shall" in Article 39A. It is emphasised that the legal system should be able to deliver justice expeditiously on the basis of equal opportunity and provide free legal aid to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reasons of economic or other disabilities. It was in this context that the Parliament enacted the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987. One of the aims of the Act is to organise Lok Adalats to secure that the operation of legal system promotes justice on the basis of an equal opportunity. The Act gives statutory recognition to the resolution of disputes by compromise and settlement by the Lok Adalats. The concept has been gathered from system of Panchayats which has roots in the history and culture of this country. It has a native flavour known to the people. The provisions of the Act, based on indigenous concept are meant to supplement the court system. They will go a long way in resolving the disputes at almost no cost to the litigants and with minimum delay. At the same time, the Act is not meant to replace and supplant the court system. The Act is a legislative attempt to decongest the courts of heavy burden of cases.
4. Chapter VI of the Act deals with Lok Adalats. It starts with Section 19 which reads as follows:
"19. (1) Every State Authority or District Authority or the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee or every High Court Legal Services Committee or, as the case may be, Taluk Legal Services Committee may organise Lok Adalats at such intervals and places and for exercising such jurisdiction and for such areas as it thinks fit.
(2) Every Lok Adalat organized for an area shall consist of such number of :
(a) serving or retired judicial officers; and
(b) Other persons, of the area as may be speccified by the State Authority or the District Authority or the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee or the High Court Legal Services Committee, or as the case may be, the Taluk Legal Services Committee, organising such Lok Adalat.
(3) The experience and qualifications of other persons referred to in clause (b) of subsection (2) for Lok Adalats other orga nised by the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee shall be such as may be prescribed by the Central Government in consultation with the Chief Justice of India.
(4) The experience and qualifications of other persons referred to in clause (b) of subsection (2) for Lok Adalats other than referred to in subsection(3) shall be such as may be prescribed by the State Government in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court, (5) A Lok Adalat shall have jurisdiction to determine and to arrive at a compromise or settlement between the parties to a dispute in respect of
(i) any case pending before; or
(ii) any matter which is falling within the jurisdiction of and is not brought before, any court for which the Lok Adalat is organized.
Provided that the Lok Adult shall have no jurisdiction in respect of any case or matter relating to an offence not compoundabe under any law."
5. While subsection (1) of Section 19 deals with organisation of Lok Adalats, subsection (2) thereof deals with the constitution of the Lok Adalats. Under subsection (1) of section 19, Lok Adalats can be organized by the concerned authority or committee for exercising such jurisdiction and for such areas as it thinks fit. Thus, in a given area different and separate Lok Adalats could be constituted for dealing with specified types of matters. According to subsection (2), a Lok Adalat is to consist of serving or retired judicial officer(s) and other person(s). The experience and qualifications of 'other persons' referred to in clause (b) of subsection (2) for the Lok Adalats organized by the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee are to be prescribed by the Central Government in consultation with the Chief Justice of India and for the Lok Adalats organized by the High Court Legal Services Committee are to be prescribed by the State Government in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court. According to clause (i) of subsection (5) of Section 19, a Lok Adalat has the jurisdiction to determine and to arrive at a compromise or settlement between the parties to a dispute in respect of any case pending before any Court. Similarly, under clause (ii) of subsection (5) of Section 19 any matter which is at a prelitigative or pretrial stage and is falling within the jurisdiction of the Lok Adalat and has not been brought before a Court of law can also be referred to it by the concerned authority or committee. Subsection (5) of Section 19 is of a very wide amplitude. It confers the widest possible jurisdiction on the Lok Adalat in the sense that the Lok Adalat can deal with any matter irrespective of its legal character and irrespective of the Court or Tribunal in which it might be pending and even when it is not so pending and is still at a pretrial stage. However, as per proviso to subsection (5) of Section 19, criminal matters relating to an offence which is not compoundable have been kept outside the purview of a Lok Adalat. Serious crimes therefore are beyond the ambit of a Lok Adalat but all other cases which do not fall under the proviso to subsection (5) of Section 19 come within the sway of a Lok Adalat.
6. Section 20 deals with cognizance of a case by a Lok Adalat. It read as follows:
20.(1) where in any case referred to in clause (i) of subsection (5) of section 19
(i)(a) the parties thereof agree; or
(b) one of the parties thereof makes an application to the court, for referring the case to the Lok Adalat for settlement and if such court is prima facie satisfied that there are chances of such settlement; or
(ii) the court is satisfied that the matter is an appropriate one to be taken cognizance of by the Lok Adalat;
the court shall refer the case to the Lok Adalat;
Provided that no case shall be referred to the Lok Adalat under subclause (b) of clause (ik) or clause (ii) by such court except after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the parties.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, the Authority or Committee organising the Lok Adalat under subsection (1) of Section 19 may, on receipt of an application from any one of the parties to any matter referred to clause (ii) of subsection (5) of section 19 that such matter needs to be determined by a Lok Adalat, refer such matter to the Lok Adalat, for determination :
Provided that no matter shall be referred to the Lok Adalat except after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the other party.
(3) Where any case is referred to a Lok Adalat under subsection (1) or where a reference has been made to it under sub section(2), the Lok Adalat shall proceed to dispose of the case or matter and arrive at a compromise or settlement between the parties.
(4) Every Lok Adult shall, while determining any reference before it under this Act, with utmost expedition to arrive at a compromise or settlement between the parties and shall be guided by the principles of justice, equity, fair play and other legal princi ples.
(5) Where no award is made by the Lok Adalat on the ground that no compromise or settlement could be arrived at between the parties, the record of the case shall be returned by the Court, from which the reference has been received under subsection (1) for disposal in accordance with law.
(6) Where no award is made by the Lok Adalat on the ground that no compromise or settlement could be arrived at between the parties, in a matter referred to in subsection (2), that Lok Adalat shall advice the parties to seek remedy in a court.
(7) Where the record of the case is returned under subsection (5) to the court, such court shall proceed to deal with such case from the stage which was reached before such reference under sub section (1).
7. Thus, under Section 20(1) of the Act, a Lok Adalat can take cognizance of a case where the party agrees to refer the same to it or where one of the parties makes an application to the court for referring the same to the Lok Adalat for settlement and if such a court is prima facie satisfied that there are chances of such a settlement, it can make a reference to the Lok Adalat. Even without the parties agreeing for a reference of a case to the Lok Adalat and without any application from any of the parties for such a reference the Court on its own motion, on being satisfied that the matter is an appropriate one to be taken cognizance by the Lok Adalat, can refer the same to the Lok Adalat. Thus it would be seen that the reference to the Lok Adalat does not depend upon the consent of the parties alone. In an appropriate case the Court can refer the matter to a Lok Adalat without the consent of parties. As per subsection (2) of section 20, the authority or committee organising the Lok Adalat under subsection (1) of section 19, on receipt of an application of any one of the parties to any matter falling within the jurisdiction of the Lok Adalat and which is not brought before the court, can refer the same to a Lok Adalat. Therefore, both pending and prelitigative matters can be sent to a Lok Adalat. While the former class of matters can be sent to the Lok Adalat by the respective courts where such matters are pending, the latter type of cases can be referred to the Lok Adalat by the State Authority, District Authority or Supreme Court Legal Services Authority or High Court Legal Services Committee or Taluka Legal Services Committee, as the case may be, but the reference in such cases is to be made only after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the parties by the concerned Authority or Committee. Under subsection (3) of Section 20, the Lok Adalat is required to proceed to dispose of the matter by arriving at a compromise or settlement between the parties. Under subsection (4) of Section 20, the Lok Adalat is required to arrive at a compromise or settlement between the parties by being guided by the principles of justice, fair play and other legal principles. In case the Lok Adalat fails to make an award (1) when reference is made by the court it is required under subsection (5) of section 20 of the Act to return the reference to the Court from which the same was received, or (2) when reference is made by an authority or committee, it is required under subsection (6) thereof to advise the parties to seek remedy in a Court of law. As per subsection (7) of section 20 of the Act, the Court on receipt of the record from the Lok Adalat is required to proceed with the case from the stage reached before such a reference was made under subsection (1) of Section 20.
8. According to Section 21, the award of the Lok Adalat is to be deemed to be a decree of a civil court and every award made by the Lok Adalat is final and binding on the parties to the dispute and no appeal is provided to any Court against the award. This is a very useful and important provision. The provision is meant to give finality to the decision of the Lok Adalat. Again under section 21 of the Act, in the event of a resolution of a dispute by the Lok Adalat in a case referred to it by a court of law, the court fee is required to be refunded in the manner provided under the Court Fee Act, 1879. The last section of the Chapter, namely, Section 22 confers powers on the Lok Adalat as are vested in a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure for summoning/examining witnesses on oath, discovery and production of documents, reception of evidence by affidavits, requisition of public records or documents etc.
9. From a reading of Chapter VI it is clear that the Lok Adalats are ambulatory in nature and can supplement the efforts of the court to resolve disputes. The salient features of Chapter VI can be summed up as follows :
(1) Lok Adalat(s) can be constituted of : (a) serving or retired judicial officers, and (b) other persons;
(2) Except matters relating to offences which are not compound able, a Lok Adalat has jurisdiction to deal with all matters whether pending or at pretrial stage provided a reference is made to it by a court in the case of a pending matter, or a reference is made to it by the concerned Authority or Committee when the dispute is at a pretrial stage and not before a court of law.
(3) A Lok Adalat is required to determine the matter by compromise or settlement between the parties. In doing so it is to be guided by the principles of justice, equity, fair play and other legal principles.
(4) Lok Adalats can be constituted for different areas. At the same time different Lok Adalats can be constituted for exercising distinct and separate jurisdictions over an area.
(5) The award passed by the Lok Adalat is deemed to be a decree of a civil court and therefore enforceable as a decree.
(6) Every award made by the Lok Adalat is final and binding on the parties to the dispute and no appeal is provided therefrom;
(7) In the event of a matter determined by compromise or settle ment by a Lok Adalat in a case referred to it by a court, the court fee is to be refunded in the manner laid down in the Court Fee Act, 1879.
10. Since a Lok Adalat is presided over by a sitting or retired judge or judicial officer it evokes instant acceptability and creditability. Experience shows that matters can be disposed of by Lok Adalats expeditiously by reconciliation.
11. Mr. Sikri, learned senior counsel for the M.T.N.L., submitted that there was no need to appoint a Lok Adalat under the Act in so far as the M.T.N.L. was concerned as various remedies are available to the subscribers for redressal of their grievances, namely, (1) remedy by way of statutory arbitration under section 7B of the Indian Telegraph Act; (2) remedy by way of preferring a complaint before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum under the Consumer Protection Act; (3) remedy by way of preferring a complaint before the M.T.R.P. Commission under the M.T.R.P. Act; (4) remedy by way of instituting appropriate proceedings in case of certain types of cases before the Telecom Regulatory Authority under the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997; and (5) remedy by way of seeking relief before the Telephone Adalats. Learned counsel submitted that the number of cases pending in various courts, consumer forum, M.R.T.P. Commission, etc., in which the M.T.N.L. is a party, are merely about 2,500.
12. Learned counsel for the D.D.A. took the stand that there was no need to establish a permanent Lok Adalat for resolution of cases in which the D.D.A. was a party.
13. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the M.T.N.L. and the D.D.A. According to the available statistics there is a very huge pendency of cases in various courts. The staggering pendency is disturbing. It must be noted that in this country there are only 10.5 judges per million population. The situation is compounded by lack of adequate number of supporting staff and equipment. In the present scenario there is not only an imminent requirement of increasing the number of courts commensurate with the growing population and ever increasing litigation, there is also a paramount need to appoint permanent Lok Adalats where the expertise of the retired judges and judicial officers and other suitable persons could be utilised in resolution of matters by reconciliation. Already a lot of precious time has been lost in the implementation of the Act. It was in October 1987 that the Act was enacted by the Parliament with a view to creating legal authorities and estab lishing Lok Adalats and ensuring that the people of India receive expeditious justice on the basis of equality. Despite the urgent need to take steps to remove clogging of cases in courts, the Act was not enforced for almost eight years after its enactment. It was only on November 9, 1995 that the provisions of the Act except Chapter III relating to setting up of Legal Services Authorities were extended to all States and Union Territories. Chapter III, however, was enforced in eleven States and one Union Territory during the period November 1995 to September 1996. Since the remaining States and Union Territories failed to enforce and implement the provisions of Chapter III, the Supreme Court in Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee Vs. Union of India and others, , and Supreme Court Legal Services Committee Vs. Union of India and others, , intervened in the matter and passed directions for enforcing and implementing the Act. Even today despite such a heavy backlog of cases there are certain quarters who are still not willing to make use of the provisions of the Act. It appears that the misgivings of the D.D.A. and the M.T.N.L. in regard to the setting up of permanent Lok Adalats must be ignored. It is in the interest of the citizens of India that permanent Lok Adalats are established and held continuously so that the purpose for which the Act was enacted could be achieved. It appears to me that unless permanent and continuous Lok Adalats are set up, it may not be possible to reduce the pendency in courts. Besides, a solitary appearance of parties before a Lok Adalat which is organized for a day or two may not be adequate for arriving at a compromise or settlement. The need of the hour is frantically beckoning for setting up Lok Adalats on permanent and continuous basis. What we do today will shape our tomorrow. The choice is between an overburdened court system being crushed under its own weight, and alternative dispute resolution machinery including an inexpensive and quick dispensation of justice by Lok Adalats. For facilitating expeditious disposal of all kinds of cases permanent Lok Adalats must be set up in DVB, MCD, NDMC, DDA, MTNL, GIC and various departments of the Government. It also seems to me that the accumulation of cases in courts can be reduced or prevented if permanent Lok Adalats are established for the Union Territory of Delhi. There should also be one or more permanent Lok Adalats, depending upon the magnitude of the work, for resolving the disputes between (1) the citizens and the Government of India, and (2) the Government of India and its employees.
14. It will be apposite to quote the significant statement of the then Executive Chairman of the NALSA, Dr. Justice A.S. Anand, now the Chief Justice of India, in regard to the Lok Adalats : "....The Awards passed by Lok Adalat judges are now deemed to be decrees of a civil court and the Court Fee paid in such cases is liable to be refunded in the manner provided under the Court Fees Act, 1870. These Awards are final and binding on all the parties to the dispute and no appeal lies to any court against these Awards. It is thus very important that we should put these provisions in active use and try our best to hold as many Lok Adalats as possible and include therein different categories of cases like matrimonial disputes, bank loan matters, land acquisition cases, matters relating to industrial disputes, land lord tenant controversies and petty criminal cases etc. The cases between different departments of the Government, State owned corporations etc. can also be settled through Lok Adalats. This however, would be possible if you initiate a dialogue with the State Governments to persuade them to settle their disputes through Lok Adalats instead of resorting to litigation which is not only expensive and additional financial burden on the Government, but is time consuming also...." (See the first issue of 'Nyayadeep')
15. At this stage it will also be convenient to refer to the affidavit of Shri R.C. Chopra, Member Secretary, NALSA. The affidavit records the minutes of the first Annual Meeting of the State Services Authorities which was held on September 12, 1998 under the auspices of NALSA and which was presided over by Dr.Justice A.S. Anand, the then Chairman of the NALSA. The minutes read as follows : "Some of the members were of the view that for settling cases pertaining to Government Public Sector Undertakings, separate Lok Adalats may be established by Legal Services Authorities in the departments itself where the matters pertaining to those departments may be taken up and settled by Lok Adalat Judges. It was resolved that the Central Government through the Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs should impress upon all departments of the Central Government, State Government and Public Sector Undertakings to refer as many cases as possible to Lok Adalats for conciliatory settlement and also examine the feasibility of establishing separate Lok Adalats for different departments. The matters at prelitigative stage could also be settled through Lok Adalats. It was decided that the Law Ministry, NALSA as well as State Legal Services Authorities should take immediate steps for impressing upon the concerned Governments and Departments to refer more and more cases to Lok Adalats. "
The affidavit also refers to the speech of Mr. Justice K. Ramaswamy, the then Executive Chairman of NALSA. The speech highlights the part played by the Lok Adalats and their potential to reduce the cases pending in courts thus :
"....As a part of the strategy to relieve heavy burden on the judicial time of the courts with pending cases, Lok Adalat Camps were started initially in Gujarat State in March 1982 and later extended throughout the country. Till 1.11.95 as many as 12,208 Lok Adalats had been organized wherein 55,59,923 cases were settled... Lok Adalats have become supplementary to the courts for settlement of disputes amicably on the principle of give and take....
xx xx ".... The pendency of cases in the courts at different levels and the High Court of each State is increasing at an alarmingly high rate and huge backlog are getting accumulated frustrating the faith of the litigant public in the Judiciary and the affectivity of the judicial decisions. On account thereof, extraconstitu tional remedies are being resorted to and worked out which is deleterious to the rule of law...there is, therefore, an absolute need to conduct Lok Adalats, as a continuous process as a supple ment to the disposal of the cases by the Courts...
xx xx "
16. The need to establish permanent and continuous Lok Adalat(s) and to resort to alternative dispute resolution mechanism cannot be overlooked. The Lok Adalat and alternative dispute resolution experiment must succeed otherwise the consequence for an overburdened court system would be disastrous. The system needs to inhale the life giving oxygen of justice through the Lok Adalats.
17. In the circumstances, therefore, it is directed that permanent Lok Adalats shall be set up in the Delhi Administration, Delhi Development Authority, Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, New Delhi Municipal Committee, General Insurance Corporation of India by the Delhi State Legal Services Authority within a period of four weeks. It is further directed that these Lok Adalats shall meet at such intervals as may be dictated by the necessity to hold the same according to the workload. However, to start with Lok Adalats in the Delhi Administration, D.D.A., M.T.N.L., M.C,D., N.D.M.C. and the G.I.C. can be held twice a week. In case of D.V.B. the Lok Adalat shall be held five days a week in view of the large number of cases which are pending in various courts. The D.V.B. shall comply with the order dated October 15, 1998 and subsequent orders. Each of the above said organisations shall provide adequate and proper infrastructure for holding the Lok Adalats. Affidavits in compliance shall be filed by the Delhi State Legal Services Authority, Delhi Administration, D.V.B., D.D.A., M.T.N.L., M.C.D., N.D.M.C. and the G.I.C.
18. Issue notice to the Government of India as to why permanent Lok Adalat(s) should not be directed to be established for disposal of disputes between the Government of India and other persons including its employees.
19. Issue notice to the Government of N.C.T. of Delhi why permanent Lok Adalat(s) be not established for the Union Territory of Delhi for resolution of disputes between the private parties. List the matter for further hearing on March 5, 1999.
A copy of this order be given dasti to learned counsel for the Delhi Administration, D.V.B., D.D.A., M.T.N.L., M.C.D., N.D.M.C. and the G.I.C.