Hon’ble Pankaj Mithal, J.—Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.N. Iqbal Hasan holding brief of Sri Firoz Haider learned counsel for the respondent No. 3, the main contesting party.

2. The petitioner in this writ petition has come up against the award of the Permanent Lok Adalat adjudicating the claim of the respondent No. 3 on merits and awarding Rs. 2,01,000/- to her with 10% interest w.e.f. 2.3.2012, the date on which the petition was presented till its payment.

3. One of the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the judgement, order and award of the Lok Adalat is without jurisdiction as Permanent Lok Adalat is not vested with any authority to adjudicate the dispute between the parties on merits. The second argument is that the Insurance Policy covered the owner as well as the worker of the establishment but in respect of the worker the liability of the Insurance Company was upto the Rs. 1,00,000/-only and as such the award of Rs. 2,00,000/- is illegal.

4. The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was enacted by the Parliament to provide free legal services to the weaker section of the Society and to ensure that justice is not denied to any citizen by reason of economic, social or other disabilities by organising Lok Adalats to provide speedy alternative and innovative mechanism for dispute resolution.

5. Chapter VI-A titled “Pre-Litigation Conciliation and Settlement” was added to the above Act by Act No. 37 of 2002. It contains Section-22A to Section 22-E providing for the establishment of Permanent Lok Adalats, the method of resolution and settlement of disputes to be followed for the purpose and if necessary, for its adjudication in terms of award.

6. The role of conciliation, settlement and adjudication assigned to Permanent Lok Adalat under the Act is at the pre-litigation stage that is before a dispute between the parties is brought before the Court.

7. The jurisdiction of the Permanent Lok Adalat is in relation to ‘public utility services’ as defined under Section 22-A of the Act subject to pecuniary jurisdiction as provided under Section 22-C of the Act of Rs. Ten lakhs which has been enhanced to Rs. one crore.

8. The aforesaid provision further provides that Permanent Lok Adalat shall not have jurisdiction in respect of any matters relating to an offence which are not compoundable under law meaning thereby that it has jurisdiction in matters of a criminal nature in respect of offences which are compoundable.

9. Section 22-C(2) of the Act lays down that a party who has approached the Permanent Lok Adalat for the settlement of the dispute shall not invoke jurisdiction of any other Court in connection with the same dispute. In other words, it excludes the jurisdiction of all other Courts in respect of the matters cognizable by Permanent Lok Adalat if any of the party to the dispute has invoked the jurisdiction of the Permanent Lok Adalat for its settlement.

10. Section 22-C (3), (4), (5), and (7) of the Act lays down the procedure to be followed before the Permanent Lok Adalat for conciliation and settlement of any dispute and by virtue of Section 12-D of the Act it has been provided that in conducting the proceedings or deciding a dispute on merit, the Permanent Lok Adalat shall be guided by the principles of natural justice fair play, equity etc.

11. Section 22-C(8) of the Act categorically lays down that where the parties fail to reach an agreement for the settlement of the dispute, the Permanent Lok Adalat shall, if the dispute does not relate to any offence, decide the same. It means that if any dispute before the Lok Adalat is not settled by conciliation and if it does not relate to any offence, it can be decided by the Permanent Lok Adalat on merits.

12. In view of the language used in Section 22-C(8) and 22-D of the Act it is ample clear that the Permanent Lok Adalat is not only possessed with the power of conciliation and settlement