M.M.KUMAR,J - (1.) THE Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association (for brevity, 'the Bar Association') has filed the instant petition as a Public Interest Litigation under Article 26 of the Constitution seeking various facilities like electricity and water in respect of Bar rooms, Bar Library, office of the Bar Association and Bar Lounge etc. The letter dated 29.03.2005 (P-2) sent to the Registrar General of the Punjab and Haryana High Court- respondent No. 4 (for brevity, 'the High Court') by the Under Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of Law and Justice, declining the request of the Bar Association, as routed through the High Court for not effecting any re- covery of water/electricity charges from the Bar Association, is also subject matter of challenge and a prayer has been made for quashing the same.
(2.) THE Bar Association has claimed that it regulates and controls the facilities including the space for the comfortable sitting of the member- advocates and for parking of their vehicles. It also renders service to the member-advocates for supplying daily cause list to them and provides a platform to all those members to raise their collective grievances. The petition has been filed by way of Public Interest Litigation claiming that the facilities claimed by the petitioners are not only for the members of the Bar Association but would also enure to the benefits of general litigant public who visit the High Court premises in a large number every working day in connection with their cases. The petition has been filed in pursuance to resolution dated 30.01.2007, which has been placed on record. The basis of the claim is a letter sent by the Supreme Court Bar Association showing (P-1) that the payment of electricity charges/air-conditioning charges in respect of the Bar Libraries, Bar Rooms, Bar Association Office, Bar Lounge are borne by Hon'ble Supreme Court and no payment is made by the Bar Association of the Supreme Court. The letter dated 16.07.2004 (P-1) has been placed on record in support of the aforementioned claim. It has also been asserted that the Bar Association has been staking its claim that it is not liable to pay any water, electricity charges and representation in that connection was routed through the Registrar General of the High Court. In response to the aforementioned representation, the Ministry of Law and Justice Government of India, has addressed a communication to the Registrar General of the High Court, dated 29.03.2005 (P-2), stating that no free water/electricity could be supplied to the Bar Association. The aforementioned communication dated 29.03.2005 was sent to the Secretary of the Bar Association on 16.09.2006 (P-3) by the Registrar General of this Court. The Bar Association again made representations dated 12.07.2006 (P-3A) and 27.10.2006 (P-4) to the High Court as well as to the worthy Law Minister (P-5 and P-6) respectively). In the absence of any concrete reply, the Bar Association has approached this Court with the aforementioned prayer. The stand of respondent No. 1-Union of India is that ever since the inception of the High Court, the electricity and water supply charges of the High Court are paid by the High Court. In para 2 of the written statement filed on behalf of respondent No. 1, the plea is that since the inception of the High Court the charges for consumption for consumption of electricity and water in all parts of the High Court building, which include original Bar Library and Bar rooms is borne by the High Court. Similar norm is followed by the Andhra Pradesh, Kerala and Allahabad High Courts. Although it is claimed that in Andhra Pradesh some maximum limit of consumption of electricity has been imposed. Reference has also been made to the Sikkim, Kerala and other High Courts where different practices are followed. In para 6, the plea taken is that the advocates are neither part of the High Court as claimed by them nor the staff of the State Government as their business is of private nature and their work is not connected with any Government service.
(3.) HOWEVER , the stand of the U.T. Administration-respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in para 6 of their reply is that 'this Hon'ble Court (on the administrative side) has been duly paying the requisite charges/dues against such metered connections standing in its name. Any enhancement of load in the name of the Bar Association in respect of metered connections standing in the name of this Hon'ble Court (on the administrative side) is clearly and obviously impermissible. In para 2 of the reply, a similar stand has been taken by emphasizing that free electricity/water could not be given to anyone. Referring to the letter dated 16.07.2004, sent by the Supreme Court Bar Association (P-1), the stand of the U.T. Chandigarh, is as under :- "It is clearly and expressly stated in Annexure P-1 itself that the payment of the said electricity charges is borne by the Hon'ble supreme Court. It is indubitably apparent on the petitioner's own showing that even in the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the consumption of electricity by the Bar Association or its members is not free but paid for. Even though, therefore, the practice followed administratively in the Hon'ble Supreme Court regarding payment of electricity charges does not constitute a legal or judicial precedent, the practice as evidenced by Annexure P-1 also shows clearly that the claim of the petitioner Association for payment of electricity and water charges by the respondent Administration is completely misdirected. It is also necessary to point out in this context that ever since the inception of the High Court, this Hon'ble Court (on the administrative side, through and in the name of the Registrar of the High Court) has been paying for the consumption of electricity and water in all parts of the High Court building including the original Bar Library and the Bar Rooms..." ;