Advocates can't be treated like servants: Rajasthan High Court sets aside removal of counsel by JDA

The Rajasthan High Court recently set aside the Jaipur Development Authority (JDA)'s decision to remove various lawyers engaged by it as Assistant Advocates from time to time [Pratap Singh v Jaipur Development Authority]

Justice Ganesh Ram Meena observed that advocates cannot be treated like servants and dismissed without following any procedure.

"This Court is of the opinion that the lawyers have some dignity and they cannot be treated like a servant. Their engagement or disengagement has to be as per the reasonable terms and conditions. The dignity of a lawyer cannot be put to compromise. The respondents-authorities cannot be allowed to engage or disengage a lawyer for a legal work at their whims. The engagement or disengagement has to be in accordance with some procedure and terms and conditions," the Bench said.

The Court directed the JDA to continue the counsel as Assistant Advocates. Further, the JDA has been directed to frame a comprehensive policy for eligibility, tenure and procedure regarding engagement and removal of Assistant Advocates.

"The petitioners whose writ petitions are allowed by this order shall be allowed to continue as Assistant Advocates till their work is found to be qualitative and satisfactory or any such policy/ guidelines/ instructions are framed as directed," the Court ordered.

The Court also impressed upon the State to incorporate a provision for representation of women lawyers and lawyers from scheduled caste/ tribe, backward classes and weaker sections of the society.

The directions were passed while allowing a batch of petitions challenging the removal of Assistant Advocates engaged by the JDA for coordination between its officers and panel counsel.

One of the conditions for the engagement was that if the work performance of the Assistant Advocates was not found to be satisfactory, they could be removed on the report of the Zone Commissioner.

Advocate Pratap Singh, one of the petitioners before the Court, was engaged in 2009 and removed last year along with various others lawyers.

The counsel representing the lawyers argued that their removal was in violation of principles of natural justice and contrary to the terms and conditions of engagement.

In the judgment dated March 25, the Court noted that JDA had failed to point to any report regarding the unsatisfactory work performance of the Assistant Advocates, who petitioned the Court against their removal.

"It has come out that the work performance of the petitioners has been certified to be qualitative and satisfactory by the respondent- Authority and still under the directions of the Hon’ble Minister, their engagements have been cancelled for no good reason. The respondents have failed to convince this Court that as to why the lawyers who have gained much experience as Assistant Advocates are being thrown out for no good reason," the Bench added.

The Court also opined that the JDA could have provided a tenure for the engagement of Assistant Advocates but since they had not done so, they were under an obligation to adhere to the terms and conditions incorporated in the orders of engagement.

It, thus, ruled that the Assistant Advocates' removal was an arbitrary act. The Court acknowledged that the State has an authority to engage the lawyers of its own choice and confidence. However, it added that any action for engagement or their removal should be reasonable and not arbitrary.

"When the terms and conditions of engagements of Assistant Advocates like the petitioners provide for their removal only on count of work performance then the respondents could not disengage or cancel their engagements at their whims," the judge said.

Accordingly, the Court quashed the orders of cancellation of engagement of petitioners as Assistant Advocates and ordered that their services be continued.

Senior Advocates Kamlakar Sharma and RN Mathur with advocates Yogesh Kalla, Ranvijay Singh, Dinesh Yadav, Ankit Yadav, Sahil Sharma, Ashish Sharma, Ravi shanker Sharma, Pawan Sharma and Azad Ahmed appeared for the petitioners.

Advocates Abhishek Sharma, Pooja Sharma, Rishabh Khandelwal, Ajay Shukla and Raghav Sharma appeared for the JDA.

[Read Judgment]