SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(Gau) 620

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (KOHIMA BENCH)
IQBAL AHMED ANSARI, J.
The Nagaland Bar Association – Appellant
Vs.
The State of Nagaland and Anr. – Respondent
W.P. (C) No. 92 (K) of 2003
Decided On: 25.08.2005

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: A. Zhimomi, Yangerwati, A. Walling, N. Mozhui and H. Jakhalu, Advs.
For Respondents/Defendant: Y. Longkumer, Govt. Adv.

The duty of the State to provide accommodation to advocates to ensure access to justice and uphold constitutional rights.

Headnote:

Advocates - Administration of Justice - Administration of Justice and Police Rules in Nagaland, 1937 - Articles 14, 21, and 39-A of the Constitution of India

Fact of the Case:

The Nagaland Bar Association challenged an order requiring them to vacate their room in an office complex, arguing that the State should provide accommodation to advocates to enable them to appear in various judicial courts.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the decision-making process suffered from non-application of mind and that the impugned order was wholly irrational and arbitrary, causing a serious miscarriage of justice.

Issues: The issue revolved around the duty of the State to provide accommodation to advocates and the impact of the removal of the petitioner Association on the access to justice by the litigants.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the duty of the State to provide space for advocates to make Articles 14, 21, and 39-A of the Constitution of India meaningful and lively.

Final Decision: The writ petition succeeded, and the impugned orders were set aside and quashed.

ORDER

I.A. Ansari, J.

1. Have heard Mr. A. Zhirnomi, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Mrs. Y. Longkumer, learned Govt. Advocate, appearing for the respondents.

2. Lamented George Bernard Shaw in his preface, entitled "Preface on Bosses", written for his play The Millioneress'. "The law is equal before all of us, but we are not all equal before the law". Lest this epitaph on the justice delivery system does not turn into an absolute reality or becomes a permanent feature of the judicial administration, imperative it is that justice delivery system be one, which ensures to its people reasonable, fair and just procedure. Can a Justice delivery system be regarded fair, just and reasonable, if the Advocates, as a class, are excluded, as a whole, from the justice delivery system itself ? The answer to this question has to be an unhesitant and emphatic "no", for when Advocates are regarded as Officers of the Court the Advocates, as a class, become an integral and inseverable part of the judicial system, which we have adopted under our Constitution. The exclusion of the Advocates, as a class, from the real of judicial justice' can be on the strength of specific legislation or by creating, without support of law, such situations, which may, in effect, remove the Bar, as a whole, from the entire justice delivery system.

3. In the above backdrop of facts governing the administrator of justice, let me unfold the facts and material stages, which have given rise to the present writ petition.

4. The Nagaland Bar Association was formed in the year 1969. It is the Apex Bar Association in the State of Nagaland inasmuch as the High Court Bar Association, Dimapur Bar Association and Mokokchung Bar Association are affiliated to the Nagaland Bar Association. The office complex of the Deputy Commissioner Dimapur, was constructed in the early seventies and the said office complex began functioning, sometimes, in the year 1974. At that point of time, Dimapur area was a Sub-Division under Kohima district and its administration was headed by an Additional Deputy Commissioner. In the office complex of the Deputy Commissioner/Additional Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur, aforementioned are also located, presently, the Court of Addl. Deputy Commissioner (Judicial) and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.

5. In the State of Nagaland, there is no formal separation of judiciary from the executive and in terms of the Administration of Justice and Police Rules in Nagaland, 1937, the administrative officers discharge not only executive functions, but also exercise judicial powers, in short thus, in Nagaland, the administrative officer, while discharging the executive function, also discharges various judicial powers. When the office of the Addl. Deputy Commissioner, which is presently the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur, was established in the year 1974, the Nagaland Bar Association (in short, the 'petitioner Association') was allotted one room at the ground floor thereof. By an order, dated 5-6-2003, addressed to the petitioner Association, Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur, informed the petitioner Association that the room, which is in the possession of the petitioner Association, is required to accommodate the officers of the Deputy Commissioner's establishment and, hence, the petitioner Association shall vacate the said room within 15-6-2003. Responding to the letter, dated 5-6-2003, aforementioned, the President of the petitioner Association made a representation, on 13-6-2003, addressed to the Deputy Commissioner, Dimapur, bringing it to the notice of the latter that the lawyers have been appearing in all the Courts of the administrative officers and also in judicial courts in the said building and that the number of Advocates being also on the rise, the present accommodation provided to the petitioner Association was grossly inadequate and, hence, the petitioner Association is not in a position to vacate the said room as it still requires the said room













































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top