Judgment S.K. Keshote, J.-This appeal under Section 384 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (for short ‘the Act, 1925’) is filed by the appellants against the Judgment dated 17.1.2002 of the District Judge, Sikar in Civil Miscellaneous Application No.87 of 1999. 2. The appellant filed application under Section 372 of the Act, 1925 for succession certificate. 3. Thelearned Court below under its order aforestated granted this application and succession certificate has been issued in favour of the appellants and the respondents No. 1 and 2 in proportion of 1/3rd each in respect of the amounts mentioned in division VII of the application, hence this appeal. This appeal is presented on 9th of March, 2002. The office has pointed out the defect “Court Fee deficit Rs. 9360/-”. 4. The appellants are - the widow of late Gulab Singh and two minor sons of aged 13 and 10 years. This lady and two minors are not in a position to pay the Court fees. As per Section 12 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (for short “the Act, 1987’) and more particularly Clause (c) thereof , the appellants, woman and minors, are entitled for legal services. Section 12 of the Act reads, “12. Criteria for giving legal services - Every Person who has to file or defend a a case shall be entitled to legal services under this Act if that (c) a woman or a child; 5. Legal services are defined in Clause (c) of Section 2 of the Act 1987 which reads, “(c) “Legal service” includes the rendering of any service in the con- duct of any case or other legal proceeding before any Court or other authority or tribunal and the giving of advice on any legal matter;” 6. The object and purpose of the Act, 1987 is to provide free and competent legal service to weaker sections of the society to ensure that opportunity for securing justice is not denied to any citcen by the reason of economic or other disabilities and to organise Lok Adalats to secure that the operation of legal system promotes justices on a basis of equal opportunity. The persons enumerated in Clause (a) to (h) are entitled for legal services and the appellants falls under Clause (c) of Sub-section (1) of Section 12 of the Act, 1987, thus, there cannot be any dispute that they are entitled for legal service. 7. The persons enumerated in Clause (a) to (h) are entitled for legal services and the appellants falls under Clause (c) of Sub-section (1) of Section 12 of the Act, 1987, thus, there cannot be any dispute that they are entitled for legal service. 7. It is true that the appellants have not applied for the legal service to the Rajas than High Court Legal Service Committee, but that is not the end of the matter or disentitles them from consideration by the committee of their this right. The legal services which are to be provided under the Act, 1987 is not a charity or a donation or a mercy or sympathy or concession. It is a legal right conferred to this clause of persons under the Act. 1987. It is a different matter that the Advocate has not taken the steps advising the appellants to file this appeal taking legal services from the Rajasthan High Court Legal Services Committee. In case it would have been done I am confident that leaving apart the question of Court fee the amount of other expenses would have granted and the services of the Advocate at the cost of the state would have been provided. It is unfortunate that this class of litigants who are entitled for free legal services are not being legally educated, nor made known and informed of their this right by the advocate to whom the approached. 8. Along with the appeal an application under Section 149 CPC, 1908 is filed. From this application, though not supported by an affidavit, it comes out the appellants are poor and are not able to pay Court fees. In case little trouble and care would have been taken to read the Act, 1987 I am confident that this application would not have been filed. When the appellants are entitled for the legal services they would have been advised to go and to exercise their this legal right but that has not been done and contrarily prayer has been made to defer the payment of the Court fees. 9. Be that as it may be when the matter is placed before the Court, it was sent to the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority for examination. The Secretary of the authority has submitted his report. He also personally come in the Court. The matter is not examined with reference to the Act, 1987. 9. Be that as it may be when the matter is placed before the Court, it was sent to the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority for examination. The Secretary of the authority has submitted his report. He also personally come in the Court. The matter is not examined with reference to the Act, 1987. It is submitted that whatever order is passed by the Court the same shall be complied it. It is not a proper, reasonable and befitting approach of the Secretary of the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority in such matters. 10. This report means in every mailer of the legal services entitlement of the litigant the Court has to pass the order but that is not requirement of the Act, 1987. It is the matter to be considered by the committee or Authority either on the application of the litigant or where it is sent by Court on being satisfied that litigants are not aware of their this right or are not made known of the same with reference to the legal right conferred to this class of the litigants under the Act, 1987. It is to be stated at the cost of repetition that the Court or the Authority or the Committee is not distributing any the charity, it is a legal right of the litigants enumerated in Section 12 of the Act, 1987. 11. TheSecretary to the Authority drawn attention of the Court to the Regulation No. 18 of the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority Regulations, 1999. Regulation 18 is a provision lay down the mode of providing legal services. The legal services may, be provided in all or any one or more than one of the following modes, namely, “18. Mode of providing Legal Services:-Legal Services may be provided in all or any one or more than one of the following modes, namely: - .(a) Processfees and all other charges payable or incurred in connection with any legal proceedings except Court fees; .(b) representation by a legal practitioner in a legal proceeding; .(c) obtaining of certified copies of orders and other documents in the legal proceedings; .(d) preparation of a paper book including printing and translation of documents, in the legal proceedings; .(e) any other expenses which chairman of Legal Services Committee or District Authority deem fit to grant in special circumstances of a given case.” 12. On perusal of this provision, prima facie, it appears to be contrary to the provisions of Section 12 of the Act, 1987. 13. InRegulation 18 prima facie this provision not to pay the Court fees where otherwise litigant is found to be entitled for free legal services may not be in consonance with and to fulfill the object and purpose for which the Act, 1987 has been enacted. The expenses except Court fee of filing of the litigation in each case may not be that much of heavy. So far as to of providing services of an Advocate is concerned, it is suffice to state where a litigant has to arrange Rs. 9360/-for the Court fees, he or she will also arrange the amount of the fees of the Advocate and other expenses or they may request the Advocate either to provide the free legal services or deferment of payment of his fees. It is not unknown that the advocates are providing free legal services to many of litigants. In case the Court fees is not provided moreso when the litigant of this class is entitled for free legal services irrespective of their income, assets etc., it may be contrary to the provisions of Article 39-A of the Constitution and object and purpose for fulfillment of which this Act, 1987 is enacted. 14. Be that as it may, it is not the matter here to examine the validity of this regulation as the State of Rajasthan is not a party. However Clause (e) thereof may be an enabling provision conferring wide powers upon the Legal Services Committee to grant any other expenses in the special circumstances of a given case. With reference to this provisions the matter has not been examined by the Secretary otherwise the matter would have been placed for consideration of the Legal Services Committee for grant of this expense of the Court fees to the appellants as a special case. 15. Theapplication filed by the appellants under Section 149 CrPC may be treated an application by the appellants under the Act, 1987 for grant of free legal services. 16. The registry is directed to place this application forthwith before the Rajasthan High Court Legal Services Committee, Jaipur for consideration.