The Supreme Court on Thursday disposed of a plea seeking better remuneration and service conditions for members of Permanent Lok Adalats.
The petitioners submitted that members across the country are receiving only around ₹2,500 per sitting despite the increasing workload and jurisdiction of the forums. It was further submitted that permanent members of Lok Adalats from several States, including Punjab, Bihar, Karnataka, Jharkhand and Delhi, are required to work continuously at the district level and face restrictions on undertaking other professional work.
Senior Advocate Karuna Nundy submitted that the issue of remuneration had also arisen in proceedings concerning members of consumer forums and the petitioners were not necessarily seeking parity with other adjudicatory bodies, but wanted the Court to consider what could be done within the existing financial framework.
“
“We are not saying pay us the same as this or that or whatever. We are saying do something for us, my Lords. Because, of course, when my Lords had appointed some of us to serve on your Lok Adalats, on these benches, it was a huge honour.”
The petitioners further submitted that Permanent Lok Adalats have a substantially expanded workload and that their jurisdiction now covers a wide range of public utility disputes. It was submitted that the forums had disposed of cases involving substantial amounts and that their work had become increasingly important.
The Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana, however, pointed to the financial constraints faced by Legal Services Authorities and the fact that funds allocated for particular purposes are often earmarked and cannot be diverted to other heads.
“
“It depends again from state to state. It varies from state to state that what kind of financial aid under different heads. Even for the National Legal Services Authority, when we get the fund, there are dedicated, rigidly earmarked funds. For example, if there is a fund which is allocated for the purpose of advertising schemes, you cannot divert a single penny towards any other. Similarly, state governments wherever the funds provide, all these restrictions are there. So, if the Legal Service Authorities are not in a position, we cannot declare them bankrupt by directing payment at one place. And in any case, better is to approach the jurisdictional high courts where they can examine based upon the granting received from the state.
The petitioners also referred to earlier proceedings concerning remuneration of members of consumer forums and submitted that repeated representations before authorities and High Courts had not resulted in a satisfactory resolution.
The Bench directed the concerned parties to place the relevant data and their grievances in a detailed representation before NALSA, which may thereafter take appropriate steps in the matter.