IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Vivek Agarwal and Avanindra Kumar Singh, JJ.
High Court Advocates Bar Association & Another v. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Others
Writ Petition No. 18637 of 2015 (Jabalpur);
Decided on 3.5.2024
(1) Advocate -- has to conduct himself fearlessly -- his conduct should be lawful and moral even if he is not a member of bar. (2011) 6 SCC 86 and (2010) 14 SCC 114 followed. [Para 15]
(2) Electricity Act, 2003 -- Ss. 46, 56 and 65 -- payment of electricity bills of Bar Associations by State -- petitioner Bar Associations not entitled to claim benefit of State largesse at par with Suitor's Shed or free electricity given to marginalized farmers or underprivileged sections of society -- they form a different class which cannot be termed as underprivileged section of society -- any public announcement by Chief Minister in Vakeel Panchayat will, at best, be an executive instruction -- has no statutory force -- cannot override statutory provisions contained in Electricity Act -- actual proceedings of Vakeel Panchayat reveal that decision was only to provide free electricity to Suitor's Shed used by litigants, not to bar rooms -- mutual understanding to provide certain facilities will not become a right in hands of members of association to claim them as freebies -- secondly, petitioners had taken electricity connection and entered into arena of contractual relationship with electricity company, then they cannot bypass contractual liability and seek shifting of liability to shoulders of State Government -- petition dismissed. (2012) 12 SCC 419, (2013) 5 SCC 427, (1997) 9 SCC 465 and Civil Appeal No. 5130 of 2013 followed. (2013) 1 MPLJ 597 not a precedent. Supreme Court Bar Association (2011) 13 SCC 774 distinguished. AIR 2016 Del. 135 relied on. Writ Petition No. 2165 of 2013 (PIL) decided on 30.9.2014 and Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 14402 of 2013 decided on 28.4.2014 referred to. [Paras 17, 31, 34, 35, 45 & 46]
(3) Advocate -- lawyers being promoters of development and preservers of democracy, are expected to rise above sectorial interest and contribute in all modes of national development -- they are torch bearers and conscience-keepers of people in democracy. [Para 43]
¼1½ vf/koäk & mls fuMjrkiwoZd vkpj.k djuk gksrk gS & og vf/koäk la?k dk lnL; ugha gks rc Hkh mldk vkpj.k fof/kiw.kZ vkSj uSfrd gksuk pkfg,A ¼2011½ 6 ,llhlh 86 rFkk ¼2010½ 14 ,llhlh 114 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 15½
¼2½ fo|qr vf/kfu;e] 2003 & /kkjk 46] 56 rFkk 65 & vf/koäk la?kksa ds fo|qr fcyksa dk jkT; }kjk lank; & ;kph vf/koäk la?k okndrkZ dqVh ds leku jkT; dh nku'khyrk dk vFkok oafpr fdlkuksa ;k lekt ds oafpr oxksaZ dks nh tkuh okyh fu%'kqYd fo|qr ds Qk;ns dk nkok djus ds gdnkj ugha & og ,d fHkUu Js.kh xfBr djrs gSa fTls lekt dk oafpr oxZ ugha dgk tk ldrk & odhy iapk;r esa eq[; ea=h dh dksbZ Hkh lkoZtfud ?kks"k.kk vf/kd&ls&vf/kd dk;Zikyd vuqns'k gksxh & mldk dksbZ dkuwuh cy ugha & fo|qr vf/kfu;e esa varfoZ"V dkuwuh micaèkksa ij v/;kjksgh ugha gks ldrh & odhy iapk;r dh okLrfod dk;Zokfg;ksa ls çdV fd fofu'p; dsoy eqdnescktksa }kjk mi;ksx dh tkus okyh okndrkZ dqVh dks fu%'kqYd fo|qr nsus dk Fkk] vf/koäk d{kksa dks ugha & dfri; lqfo/kk,¡ nsus dk ikjLifjd le>kSrk la?k ds lnL;ksa ds gkFkksa esa] eqr dh jsofM+;ksa ds :i esa mudk nkok djus ds fy, vf/kdkj ugha cu tk,xk & f}rh;r% ;kphx.k us fo|qr la;kstu ysdj fo|qr daiuh ls lafonkRed laca/k ds {ks= esa ços'k fd;k Fkk] fQj og lafonktkr nkf;Ro ls dUuh dkV dj nkf;Ro dks jkT; ljdkj ds da/kksa ij varfjr djus dh bZIlk ugha dj ldrs & ;kfpdk [kkfjtA ¼2012½ 12 ,llhlh 419] ¼2013½ 5 ,llhlh 427] ¼1997½ 9 ,llhlh 465 rFkk flfoy vihy Ø- 5130 lu~ 2013 vuqlfjrA ¼2013½ 1 ,eih,yts 597 iwoZ fu.kZ; ughaA vf/koäk la?k ¼2011½ 13 ,llhlh 774 çHksfnrA ,vkbvkj 2016 fnYyh 135 voyafcrA fjV ;kfpdk Ø- 2165 lu~ 2013 ¼yksd fgr eqdnek½ fu.khZr fnukad 30-9-2014 rFkk vihy dh fo'ks"k btktr gsrq ;kfpdk ¼flfoy½ Ø- 14402 lu~ 2013 fu.khZr fnukad 28-4-2014 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 17] 31] 34] 35] 45 ,oa 46½
¼3½ vf/koäk & fodkl ds çoZrd vkSj yksdra= ds ifjj{kd gksus ds dkj.k odhyksa ls çR;k'kk dh tkrh gS fd og oxZ rd lhfer fgrksa ls Åij mB dj jk"Vªh; fodkl dh leLr fo/kkvksa esa ;ksxnku nsa & og yksdra= esa turk ds iFkçn'kZd vkSj var%dj.k j{kd gSaA ¼iSjk 43½
ORDER
1. This writ petition is filed by the High Court Advocates Bar Association, Jabalpur as petitioner No.1 and M.P. High Court Bar Association as petitioner No.2 claiming that they are registered Associations of Practicing Advocates in the High Court at Jabalpur. Petitioner No.2 M.P. High Court Bar Association was established in the year 1956 when, in newly formed State of Madhya Pradesh, the M.P. High Court was established. The date of formation or registration of petitioner No.1 is not mentioned in the body of the petition but being the lead petitioner, riding on the back of parent association namely M.P. High Court Bar Association and placing reliance on the decision of Division Bench of this High Court in the case of Vinod Kumr Bhardwaj V. State of M.P. and others, (2013) 1 MPLJ 597, prayer is made that this writ petition in the form of PIL be entertained and action of respondents No.3 and 4 namely M.P. Madhya Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Company Limited and the Executive Engineer (Urban Division East) of M.P. Poorva Kshetra Vidyut Vitaran Company Limited, Jabalpur in disconnecting the electricity supply of the Bar Association and seeking recovery of electricity bills after the judgment passed by this Court and Hon’ble Apex Court, be set aside and respondents No.1 and 2 i.e. the State of Madhya Pradesh through Chief Secretary and the Principal Secretary, Department of Law and Legislative Affairs, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal be directed to make payment of the electricity bills of the Bar Associations to respondents No.3 and 4 as per the statement made by the Government of Madhya Pradesh before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. It is further prayed that respondents No.3 and 4 be directed to examine the electricity bills of the petitioners-association and not to recover any electricity charges after the judgment in the case of Vinod Kumar Bhardwaj (supra), and to refund the electricity bills paid by the petitioners after the said judgment. It is also prayed that respondents No.3 and 4 be directed to restore electricity forthwith and not to disconnect the same in future till the matter is adjudicated by respondents No.1 and 2 so that the public and litigants are not put to any inconvenience which hampers the administration of justice.
2. To substantiate the aforesaid reliefs besides placing reliance on the judgment of Division Bench of this High Court in Vinod Kumar Bhardwaj (supra), reliance is placed on the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 28.4.2014 wherein the State had challenged the orders of the Division Bench in Vinod Kumar Bhardwaj (supra), by filing Petition (s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.(s).14402/2013 wherein on the basis of the letter dated 27.5.2013, the Government of Madhya Pradesh, Department of Law and Legislative Affairs communicated to the Working Secretary, M.P. State Bar Council, Hon’ble Supreme Court passed the order as follows :
“Sub: In relation to the announcement bearing No. A-2480 made by Hon’ble Chief Minister in the Adhivakta Panchayat for payment of Electricity Bills. In relation to the abovementioned subject it is most respectfully submits that in furtherance of the announcement No. A-2482 i.e. “the proposal pertaining to payment of Electricity Bills of the places used for the sitting of the clients in the Court compound/premises will be examined” made by the Hon’ble Chief Minister in the Adhivakta Panchayat, the State Government after examination has already allotted Rs. 65,59,657/- to the Hon’ble High Court vide department memo dated 7.5.2013.
2. Learned senior counsel and counsel for the parties agree that special leave petition may be disposed of in terms of the above communication. 3. 3. The prayer made by the learned senior counsel and counsel for the parties is fair and reasonable. It is observed that the impugned order of the High Court is rendered unnecessary in view of the above communication sent by the State Government to the Working Secretary, Madhya Pradesh State Bar Council.
4. In
The central legal point established in the judgment is the obligation of the State Government to bear the expenses of electricity charges for certain premises, as per the provisions of the Electricit....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Electricity Act imposes a statutory duty on the respondents to provide electricity connection to the petitioner within a specified period,....
Supplementary bills can be raised for mistakes, but disconnection for non-payment after two years is prohibited under Section 56(2) of the Electricity Act, 2003.
Electricity Act mandates separate supply for lawful tenants without enforcing previous consumer's dues, as per modern statutory protections.
(1) When a right is created by a statute which itself prescribes remedy or procedure for enforcing right or liability, resort must be had to that particular statutory remedy before invoking discretio....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the lack of communication of assessment orders to the consumer deprived the consumer of the opportunity to contest the orders, rendering any d....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.