JUDGMENT 1. - Having heard the learned counsel for the parties. though, I am satisfied that this revision petition is not maintainable in view of the latest pronouncement of the Hon'ble Supreme in the case of Shiv Shakti Coop. Housing Society, Nagpur v. M/s. Swaraj Developers & Ors., JT 2003(4) 5 SC 255 , but I am constraint to observe that great injustice will be done in case the order dated 23.7.2001 of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sikar (for short, the Tribunal') is allowed to stand, 2. The learned Tribunal has not considered the matter in correct perspective. He has altogether forgotten that these poor claimants appellants to claiming the compensation on account of the accidental death in a motor vehicle of the only bread earner of their family. The claimants are; widow of the deceased and three minor children. It is difficult to appreciate this approach of the Presiding Officer of the Tribunal to deal with this matter as if it is a routine matter. Otherwise also on the face of it this order is perverse. It is a harsh order passed by the Presiding Officer of the Tribunal. It is a harsh order passed by the Presiding Officer of the Tribunal. It appears that the Presiding Officer of the Tribunal has no heart. He does not think humanly. He does not appreciate the human problems. He has no justice oriented approach. He altogether ignored that courts/tribunals are there to do substantial justice. 3. What was the fault of these poor claimants in this case. They engaged an Advocate. If the Advocate did not attend the Court due to call of strike, this Presiding Officer of the Tribunal non-suited them in the matter where they are claiming compensation for the accidental death of the sole bread earner of their family. This approach of the Presiding Officer of the Tribunal is difficult to appreciate. These matters are not to be decided on technicalities. For the fault of the Advocate ultimately the sufferers are the claimants i.e. the widow and three minor children of the deceased who died in a motor accident. 4. However whatever may be the consequence adverse to the claimants and whatever may be my feelings, approach and consideration, this revision petition is not maintainable and thus no relief can be granted. 5. Accordingly, this revision petition is dismissed as not maintainable. 6. 4. However whatever may be the consequence adverse to the claimants and whatever may be my feelings, approach and consideration, this revision petition is not maintainable and thus no relief can be granted. 5. Accordingly, this revision petition is dismissed as not maintainable. 6. The registry is directed to take out the certified copy of the impugned order from the file of this revision petition and send it to the Rajasthan High Court Legal Services Committee to examine the matter and if it is found fit filing of the writ petition u/Art. 227 of the Constitution of India writ petition may be filed. Along with the certified copy of the impugned order the copy of this order may also be enclosed. 7. The Rajasthan High Court Legal Services Committee is expected to deal the matter expeditiously. The widow and minor three children are otherwise also, as per Section 12 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 are entitled for free competent legal services. It is also expected from the Rajasthan High Court Legal Services Committee to provide the services of Senior Advocate of the Court. It has been told by many of the Senior Advocates in the Court that they are ready to provide the free legal services to the poor litigants but their services are not availed of. What they further said that they will not charge even the fees which is paid to them by the Rajasthan High Court Legal Services Committee. The Senior Advocates, who I have stated this before the Court as my memory goes, are Shri S.N. Shah, Shri Ajay Rastogi, Shri M.M. Ranjan etc. To provide free services of an Advocate under this scheme of free legal services does not mean the services of a junior Advocate. Free competent legal services mean to provide s the services of competent Advocate. otherwise it will be nothing but only a formality observed. Be that as it may these are the matters for consideration of the Rajasthan High Court Legal Services Committee. 8. Free competent legal services mean to provide s the services of competent Advocate. otherwise it will be nothing but only a formality observed. Be that as it may these are the matters for consideration of the Rajasthan High Court Legal Services Committee. 8. A copy of this order be sent to claimant appellant No. 1 Smt. Manohari the widow of the deceased who died in the motor vehicle accident, to by the registered post AD, putting a note thereon in Hindi to the effect that her matter has been referred to the Rajasthan High Court Legal Services Committee for consideration of filing writ petition u/Art. 227 of the Constitution of India in the matter. She may either personally or through her representative approach to the Rajasthan High Court Legal Services Committee in the matter. The claimants-petitioners are free to apply for the review of the impugned order before the Tribunal. In case. such an application is filed the learned Tribunal is expected to decide the same having justice oriented approach and to do substantial justice to the parties, where such an application is filed the Tribunal to decide the same within one month after service of the notice of the same on other side or his their Advocate(s). *******