New Delhi: Justice Dipankar Datta of Supreme Court was placing his views at an interactive session which preceded a lecture by Justice Surya Kant at Delhi’s India International Centre (IIC) in memory of Ashok Kumar Sen who was an outstanding lawyer, politician and India’s longest serving Union Law Minister.
While discussing facet of legendary barrister Sen as one who piloted the Legal Services Authority Act 1987, Justice Datta narrated an incident perhaps to drive home his point that in the present day context one need to introspect if the purpose for which the Act was enacted was being realised in letter and spirit and whether legal services authorities have misplaced priorities.
The primary question Justice Datta asked: How was the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) which in a case heard by him as Calcutta HC judge a decade back claimed “it did not have funds” to bear the travel and accommodation expenses of a poor person belonging to SC community (he had to travel from Kolkata to SC in Delhi) ten years down the line accommodating large number of High Court judges (six to seven from each state HC) in 5 star hotels for its conferences?
Is this the purpose for which the Legal Services Authority Act was enacted? Is this the service we are giving to the people who are really in need of legal aid? Asks Justice Datta.
The hard-hitting comments from Justice Datta made the moderator of the discussion Araghya Sengupta (Research Director at the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy) to say “This is something for all of us to introspect…Legal Services Authority Act was enacted with a lot of promise”
HERE IS WHAT JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA SAID:
“About a decade back when I was in Calcutta HC a member of Scheduled Caste community who was entitled to free legal aid filed a writ petition.The prayer was this: Look here sir I have been embroiled in litigation for last 10 years my property has been taken away under SARFAESI Act. I have been fighting litigation which has ruined my resources.
Ultimately I succeeded before the division bench but the other side has taken matter to supreme court.So I have been issued notice and I want to defend my case before Supreme Court. But SC being SC I may not be able to place my case as good as I wish to.So I approached the State Legal Services Authority with a request….i don’t have money to go to Delhi to brief a lawyer. Kindly ask state legal service authority to bear my travel expenses and accommodation expenses”, said Justice Datta.
“I found the person lacking in legal knowledge so I appointed an amicus who argued very well .He also assisted the court to inform that legal services also included services of any kind its wide and expansive so I ultimately ruled that if legal services authority should help marginalised section not merely on paper it has to be made a reality otherwise it would largely remain a mirage…a person who wants to go to Delhi has no money..those times there was no virtual mode available too”, he added.
"MY GOD WHERE DOES THIS MONEY COME FROM !"
“But I had opposition from everywhere State Legal Services Authority, NALSA, Supreme Court Legal Services Authority, who said they don’t have funds to bear his expenses ..this was one of the grounds…Now 10 years down the line when I attend NALSA conferences..I FIND MY GOD WHERE DOES THIS MONEY COME FROM? 5,6 JUDGES FROM EACH HIGH COURT ARE INVITED..WE ARE ACCOMODATED IN 5 STAR HOTELS….
Is this the purpose for which the Legal Services Authority Act was enacted? Is this the service we are giving to the people who are really in need of legal aid? Justice Datta said.
Other participants in the discussion were retired SC judge Indira Banerjee, senior advocates Mahesh Jethmalani and Sanjiv Sen