The duty of the State to provide free legal aid and the limitations on the State Authority's power to spend money for utilizing the services of a foreign lawyer in a foreign Court.

This writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct respondents 1 to 3 to provide legal assistance by way of appointing a Malaysian Advocate at Malaysia to initiate legal proceedings before the Malaysian court or from on behalf of the petitioner for getting full workmen compensation from the fourth respondent in accordance with the Labour Laws at Malaysia.

This writ petition raises an important Constitutional question as to whether an Indian citizen has a right to seek legal assistance from the Government of India for appointment of an Advocate at Malaysia for initiating legal proceedings before the Malaysian Court or any judicial forum for the purpose of getting full workmen compensation from a Malaysian company.

2. The facts leading to the case are as follows:

The petitioner was a resident of Thevoor village, Nagapattinam. He went to Malaysia and worked in a company called LCL Furniture SDN BHD, fourth respondent. He worked as a Welder from 24.5.2006 to 24.5.2007. On 31.3.2007, he met with an accident during the course and arising out of his employment, which resulted in the fracture of his left leg. He was hospitalized at Malaysia from 31.3.2007 to 09.11.2007. After a major surgery was performed, he returned to India. Once again, he underwent another surgery at India followed by medical treatment. It had resulted in an huge expenditure for him. The petitioner also claimed that he belonged to Dalit community and was coming from a poor family. He has got no money for paying towards his medical treatment. Though he sought for compensation from the company, i.e. fourth respondent, there was no reply from them.

3. He sent a legal notice on 29.4.2008 to the fourth respondent company. On receipt of the notice, the companys insurer accepted their liability. He also issued an another notice on 4.11.2008 top the Labour Officer at Malaysia and there was no reply from them. The petitioner also claimed that he sent a representation dated 23.5.2009 to the Government of India, Ministry of External Affairs, i.e. first respondent, seeking for their assistance to engage a senior lawyer at Malaysia to initiate legal proceedings on his behalf and to get proper compensation.

4. In the meanwhile, the fourth respondent issued a demand draft dated 8.6.2009 and forwarded through the second respondent High Commissioner at Kolalambur, which was in turn sent to the Deputy Secretary to the State Government and in turn to the District Collector, Nagapattinam. The petitioner had received the compensation of 139 US Dollars. The said amount if converted to Indian rupee worked out not more than Rs.5000/- to Rs.6000/-. Therefore, the petitioner sent a representation to the third respondent, i.e. Tamil Nadu State Legal Aid Services Authority. When there was no reply, he has come forward to file the present writ petition.

5. Mr.M.Pari, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner placed reliance upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Maharastra Vs. Manubhai Pragaji Vashi and others reported in 1995 (5) SCC 730 in support of his submission. In paragraphs 17 and 18, the Supreme Court observed as follows:

"17. In the light of the above, we have to consider the combined effect of Article 21 and Article 39-A of the Constitution of India. The right to free legal aid and speedy trial are guaranteed fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution. The preamble to the Constitution of India assures “justice, social, economic and political”. Article 39-A of the Constitution provides “equal justice” and “free legal aid”. The State shall secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice. It means justice according to law. In a democratic polity, governed by rule of law, it should be the main concern of the State, to have a proper legal system. Article 39-A mandates that the State shall provide free legal aid by suitable legislation or schemes