Permanent Lok Adalat cannot grant decrees for adoption, as its jurisdiction is limited to public utility services only.

1. The short question involved in this writ petition is whether Permanent Lok Adalat established under S.22B of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (for brevity the "Act of 1987") has plenary jurisdiction to grant a decree for declaration relating to adoption or its jurisdiction is confined purely to the "public utility service", as defined under sub-section (b) of S.22A of the Act of 1987 ?

2. Factual Background:

The aforesaid question cropped up for consideration in the following factual background: -

2.1 Mr. Shyam Lal Banjara, who was husband of the petitioner herein died in harness on 05.07.2004 while working in the South Eastern Coalfields Limited (for short the "SECL"), which led to appointment of the petitioner herein as his dependent on the post of General Mazdoor Category - I on 24.05.2005. Thereafter, in the year 2008, the petitioner filed civil suit for declaring one Gautam Prasad Patel as her adopted son, which suit, later on, transferred to Permanent Lok Adalat, whereby vide order dated 07.02.2010, the said Lok Adalat at Raigarh while passing a decree in favour of the petitioner declared Gautam Prasad Patel as her adopted son and, ultimately, on the basis of said declaration / decree the petitioner claimed before the SECL authorities herein that the name of Gautam Prasad Patel be entered into her service record as her adopted son, which claim / application of the petitioner has been rejected by the SECL vide order in question dated 07.01.2011 (Annexure - P / 01).

2.2 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied by the aforesaid order dated 07.01.2011, this writ petition under Art.226 of the Constitution of India, after a delay of 04 years, has been filed, inter alia, stating that the aforesaid rejection is per se illegal, without jurisdiction and without authority of law and, by virtue of sub-section (1) of S.22E of the Act of 1987, the respondents - SECL is bound by the decree passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, Raigarh.

3. Return has been filed by the respondents - SECL, inter alia, stating that the Permanent Lok Adalat has no authority and jurisdiction to pass a decree / declaration to the effect that Gautam Prasad Patel is the adopted son of the petitioner for the reasons that: (i) at the time of adoption, the age of Gautam Prasad Patel was more than 15 years and, therefore, according to sub-section (iv) of S.10 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 (for short the "Act of 1956"), he was not capable of being adopted and (ii) the jurisdiction of the Permanent Lok Adalat is only confined to the "public utility service" and, for the purpose of declaratory decrees, the power has been exclusively vested on the Civil Court by virtue of S.34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (for short the "Act of 1963") and said jurisdiction could not have been exercised by the Permanent Lok Adalat, as has been done in the present case. As such, the respondent - SECL has rightly rejected the claim of the petitioner and, therefore, the present writ petition deserves to be dismissed.

4. Submissions:

Mr. Ashutosh Shukla, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that once a decree / award is passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat in exercise of powers conferred on it, by virtue of S.22E(1) of the Act of 1987, it is binding on the SECL and it cannot decline to accept on the ground that it is against the public policy or the Permanent Lok Adalat has no jurisdiction to entertain the claim. As such, the impugned