Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 1307 (ALL)

ARUN KUMAR UPADHAYA v. STATE OF U P

2009-04-10

ARUN TANDON, ASHOK BHUSHAN

body2009
ASHOK BHUSHAN, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Neeraj Upadhaya, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding respondent No. 2 (District Magistrate, Kashiram Nagar) to decide the matter afresh. A further prayer has also been made for quashing the order dated 23rd January, 2009 passed by the District Magistrate, Kashiram Nagar. 3. Brief facts necessary for deciding the writ petition are; the petitioner claims to be Secretary of Nishulk Vidhik Sahayata (Legal Aid) Samiti, 50 Arun Nagar, Etah. The petitioner claims that Nishulk Vidhik Sahayata Samiti (hereinafter referred to as the Samiti) has been authorised by the U. P State Legal Services Authority vide its letter dated 14th March, 2005. The petitioners case is that petitioner had given a representation to the District Magistrate, Kashiram Nagar to refer compoundable offences/cases, which are to be decided at pre-litigation stage. The Additional District Magistrate, Kashiram Nagar passed an order dated 22nd January, 2009 directing the subordinate officers to refer compoundable cases to the Samiti. The District Magistrate, Kashiram Nagar by an order passed on the next date, i. e. , 23rd January, 2009 cancelled the letter dated 22nd January, 2009 issued by the Additional District Magistrate holding that the said letter was issued by mistake. The District Magistrate further held that no case be referred to Samiti since it is not authorised for it. The petitioner claims to have submitted a detail representation to the District Magistrate on 29th January, 2009 by speed post praying that the order dated 23rd January, 2009 be recalled. The petitioner has also referred to an order dated 12th July, 2006 passed by the District Judge/chairman, Zila Vidhik Sewa Pradhikaran observing that in event any case before the Court is to be referred for alternate dispute resolution in accordance with Section 89 of C. P. C. , the same may be referred to the Samiti if it is permissible. The petitioners case further is that Samiti is working in accordance with the spirit of Article 39aof the Constitution of India as well as Section 89 of the C. P. C. and the aim of the Samiti is to minimise the litigation by pre-litigation settlement. The petitioners case further is that Samiti is working in accordance with the spirit of Article 39aof the Constitution of India as well as Section 89 of the C. P. C. and the aim of the Samiti is to minimise the litigation by pre-litigation settlement. The Samiti has also referred to a letter dated 30th December, 2004 issued by the National Legal Service Authority to the petitioner in reference to the proposal of the petitioner for grant of financial assistance. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of the writ petition, contended that petitioner being Secretary of the Society, which is engaged in free legal aid, it has right to get settled the disputes and the district administration is required to make reference of the disputes, which come before it and could be settled by compromise between the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the District Judge had already issued an order dated 12th July, 2006 directing all subordinate Courts to make reference for alternate dispute resolution under Section 89 of the C. P. C. to the Samiti. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order of the District Magistrate dated 23rd January, 2009 recalling the earlier order dated 22nd January, 2009 was not correct. Earlier the Additional District Magistrate has rightly directed the subordinate authorities to refer the disputes to petitioners Samiti. 5. Sri Neeraj Upadhaya, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents, refuting the submissions of counsel for the petitioner, contended that the petitioner has no right to claim that disputes be referred by the district administration at pre-litigation stage to the Samiti. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits that jurisdiction to settle the dispute even at pre- litigation stage vests with the Lok Adalats constituted in accordance with the provisions of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. There is no power or jurisdiction in any private society as claimed by the petitioner to insist that all disputes be referred to it. He submitted that private society/non- governmental organisations are authorised to participate in organising programmes for legal literacy awareness but they have no jurisdiction to settle any dispute. He referred to and relied on a scheme dated 21st April, 2003 issued by U. P. State Legal Services Authority for disposal of pre-litigation cases. He submitted that private society/non- governmental organisations are authorised to participate in organising programmes for legal literacy awareness but they have no jurisdiction to settle any dispute. He referred to and relied on a scheme dated 21st April, 2003 issued by U. P. State Legal Services Authority for disposal of pre-litigation cases. A letter dated 17th July, 1998 issued by the Member Secretary, National Legal Services Authority on the subject (accreditation of Non-Governmental organizations and Social Action Groups working in the field of Legal Awareness, Legal and Publicity Programmes and Para Legal Activities etc.) has also been relied. The learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel placed the aforesaid scheme and letter before the Court for its perusal. 6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the records. 7. The issue, which has arisen for decision in the present case is as to whether the private legal aid societies/non-Governmental organisations have any jurisdiction to claim that district administration should refer the disputes to societies/organisations for settlement. The order dated 23rd January, 2009, which is impugned in the writ petition, is an order by the District Magistrate cancelling the order dated 22nd January, 2009 issued by the Additional District Magistrate asking the subordinate administrative authorities to refer the disputes, which were to be settled by conciliation/mediation. The administration of justice is a States function. To administer justice is an obligation of the State. The Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts Act, 1887 was enacted to consolidate and amend the law relating to Civil Courts of the Bengal, North Provinces and Assam. The law relating to criminal procedure was contained in Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, which now stood repealed by Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. There are hierarchy of Courts for administration of justice exercising respective jurisdiction. Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 prior to its amendment by Act No. 46 of 1999 provided for arbitration, which was deleted by Section 49 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. Section 89 of C. P. C. was inserted by Code of Civil Procedure Amendment Act 46 of 1999, which is to the following effect: "[89. Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 prior to its amendment by Act No. 46 of 1999 provided for arbitration, which was deleted by Section 49 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. Section 89 of C. P. C. was inserted by Code of Civil Procedure Amendment Act 46 of 1999, which is to the following effect: "[89. Settlement of disputes outside the Court.- (1) Where it appears to the Court that there exist elements of a settlement which may be acceptable to the parties, the Court shall formulate the terms of settlement and give them to the parties for their observations and after receiving the observations of the parties, the Court may reformulate the terms of a possible settlement and refer the same for - (a) arbitration; (b) conciliation; (c) judicial settlement including settlement through Lok Adalat; or (d) mediation (2) Where a dispute has been referred - (a) for arbitration or conciliation, the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996) shall apply as if the proceedings for arbitration or conciliation were referred for settlement under the provisions of the Act; (b) to Lok Adalat, the Court shall refer the same to the Lok Adalat in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 20 of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 (39 of 1987) and all other provisions of that Act shall apply in respect of the dispute so referred to the Lok Adalat; (c) for judicial settlement, the Court shall refer the same to a suitable institution or person and such institution or person shall be deemed to be a Lok Adalat and all the provisions of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 (39 of 1987) shall apply as if the dispute were referred to a Lok Adalat under the provisions of that Act; (d) for mediation, the Court shall effect a compromise between the parties and shall follow such procedure as may be prescribed. ]" 8. Section 89 of C. P. C. has been resorted to by the Courts for settlement of dispute by arbitration/conciliation/mediation. Rules have also been framed by the High Court, namely, U. P. Civil Procedure Alternate Dispute Resolution Rules, 2007. By Constitution 42nd Amendment Act, 1976 a new Article was added in the Constitution being Article 39a. ]" 8. Section 89 of C. P. C. has been resorted to by the Courts for settlement of dispute by arbitration/conciliation/mediation. Rules have also been framed by the High Court, namely, U. P. Civil Procedure Alternate Dispute Resolution Rules, 2007. By Constitution 42nd Amendment Act, 1976 a new Article was added in the Constitution being Article 39a. Article 39aof the Constitution is as follows : "[39-A. Equal justice and free legal aid.- The State shall secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice, on a basis of equal opportunity, and shall, in particular, provide free legal aid, by suitable legislation or schemes or in any other way, to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities. ]" 9. Article 39a enjoins the State to frame its legislative policies so that operation of legal system promotes justice on a basis of equal opportunity and shall in particular provide free legal aid by suitable legislation or schemes. To give effect to the mandate of Article 39a of the Constitution, the Parliament enacted the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the 1987 Act) to constitute legal services authorities to provide free and competent legal services to the weaker sections of the society and to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities, and to organise Lok Adalats to secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice on the basis of equal opportunity. 10. The 1987 Act provides for constitution of National Legal Services Authority, State Legal Services Authority and District Legal Services Authority to provide for giving legal service to persons who satisfy the criteria and for that object organise the Lok Adalats. Section 19 of the 1987 Act provides for organisation of the Lok Adalat. Section 19 is quoted below: "19. Organisation of Lok Adalats.- (1) Every State Authority or District Authority or the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee or every High Court Legal Services Committee or, as the case may be, Taluk Legal Services Committee may organise Lok Adalats at such intervals and places anchor exercising such jurisdiction and for such areas as it thinks fit. Organisation of Lok Adalats.- (1) Every State Authority or District Authority or the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee or every High Court Legal Services Committee or, as the case may be, Taluk Legal Services Committee may organise Lok Adalats at such intervals and places anchor exercising such jurisdiction and for such areas as it thinks fit. (2) Every Lok Adalat organised for an area shall consist of such number of - (a) serving or retired judicial officers; and (b) other persons, of the area as may be specified by the State Authority or the District Authority or the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee or the High Court Legal Services Committee, or as the case may be, the Taluk Legal Services Committee, organising such Lok Adalat. (3) The experience and qualifications of other persons referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (2) for Lok Adalats organised by the Supreme Court Legal Services committee shall be such as may be prescribed by the Central Government in consultation with the Chief Justice of India. (4) The experience and qualifications of other persons referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (2) for Lok Adalats other than referred to in sub-section (3) shall be such as may be prescribed by the State Government in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court. (5) A Lok Adalat shall have jurisdiction to determine and to arrive at a compromise or settlement between the parties to a dispute in respect of - (i) any case pending before; or (ii) any matter which is falling within the jurisdiction of, and is not brought before, any Court for which the Lok Adalat is organised : Provided that the Lok Adalat shall have no jurisdiction in respect of any case or matter relating to an offence not compoundable under any law. " 11. According to Section 19 (5) Lok Adalats shall have jurisdiction to determine and to arrive at a compromise or settlement between the parties in respect of any case pending or any matter which is falling within the jurisdiction of, and is not brought before, any Court for which the Lok Adalat is organised. Section 20 of the 1987 Act provides for cognizance of case by Lok Adalats. Section 20 of the 1987 Act provides for cognizance of case by Lok Adalats. A pending case can be referred to Lok Adalat either when the parties thereof agree or one of the parties makes an application to the Court for referring the case to the Lok Adalat. Section 20 (2) provides for mechanism for referring the matter, which has not been brought before any Court but falls within the jurisdiction of any Court for which Lok Adalat is organised. Section 20 also provides mechanism for making reference for registering such application and referring it to Lok Adalat. Section 20 of the 1987 Act is quoted below: "20. Cognizance of cases by Lok Adalats.- (1) Where in any case referred to in clause (i) of sub-section (5) of Section 19, - (1) (a) the parties thereof agree; or (b) one of the parties thereof makes an application to the Court, for referring the case to the Lok Adalat for settlement and if such Court is prima facie satisfied that there are chances of such settlement; or (ii) the Court is satisfied that the matter is an appropriate one to be taken cognizance of by the Lok Adalat, the Court shall refer the case to the Lok Adalat: Provided that no case shall be referred to the Lok Adalat under sub-clause (b) of clause (i) or clause (ii) by such Court except after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the parties. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, the Authority or Committee organising the Lok Adalat under sub section (1) of Section 19 may, on receipt of an application from anyone of the parties to any matter referred to in clause (ii) of sub-section (5) of Section 19 that such matter needs to be determined by a Lok Adalat, refer such matter to the Lok Adalat, for determination : Provided that no matter shall be referred to the Lok Adalat except after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the other party. (3) Where any case is referred to a Lok Adalat under sub-section (1) or where a reference has been made to it under sub-section (2), the Lok Adalat shall proceed to dispose of the case or matter and arrive at a compromise or settlement between the parties. (3) Where any case is referred to a Lok Adalat under sub-section (1) or where a reference has been made to it under sub-section (2), the Lok Adalat shall proceed to dispose of the case or matter and arrive at a compromise or settlement between the parties. (4) Every Lok Adalat shall, while determining any reference before it under this Act, act with utmost expedition to arrive at a compromise or equity, fair play and other legal principles. (5) Where no award is made by the Lok Adalat on the ground that no compromise or settlement could be arrived at between the parties, the record of the case shall be returned by it to the Court, from which the reference has been received under sub-section (1) for disposal in accordance with law. (6) Where no award is made by the Lok Adalat on the ground that no compromise or settlement could be arrived at between the parties, in a matter referred to in sub-section (2), that Lok Adalat shall advice the parties to seek remedy in a Court. (7) Where the record of the case is returned under sub-section (5) to the Court, such Court shall proceed to deal with such case from the stage which was reached before such reference under sub-section (1 ). " 12. By the Legal Services Authorities (Amendment) Act, 2002 Chapter VI-A has been added providing for pre-Litigation Conciliation and Settlement. Section 22-B provides for establishment of permanent Lok Adalats and Section 22-C provides for cognizance of cases by permanent Lok Adalats. Section 22-B and 22-C (1) are quoted below: "22-B. Establishment of Permanent Lok Adalats.- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 19, the Central Authority or, as the case may be, every State Authority shall, by notification, establish Permanent Lok Adalats at such places and for exercising such jurisdiction in respect of one or more public utility services and for such areas as may be specified in the notification. (2) Every Permanent Lok Adalat established for an area notified under sub-section (1) shall consist of - (a) a person who is, or has been, a District Judge or Additional District Judge or has held judicial officer higher in rank than that of a District Judge, shall be the Chairman of the Permanent Lok Adalat; and (b) two other persons having adequate experience in public utility service to be nominated by the Central Government or, as the case may be, the State Government on the recommendation of the Central Authority or, as the case may be, the State Authority, appointed by the Central Authority or, as the case may be, the State Authority, establishing such permanent Lok Adalat and the other terms and conditions of the appointment of the Chairman and other persons referred to in clause (b) shall be such as may be prescribed by the Central Government. 22-C. Cognizance of cases by Permanent Lok Adalat - (1) Any party to a dispute may, before the dispute is brought before any Court, make an application to the Permanent Lok Adalat for the settlement of dispute: Provided that the Permanent Lok Adalat shall not have jurisdiction in respect of any matter relating to an offence not compoundable under any law: Provided further that the Permanent Lok Adalat shall also not have jurisdiction in the matter where the value of the property in dispute exceeds ten lakh rupees: Provided also that the Central Government, may, by notification, increase the limit of ten lakh rupees specified in the second proviso in consultation with the Central Authority. " 13. The 1987 Act thus provides a complete mechanism for providing free legal aid to weaker section of the society. The scheme of the 1987 Act indicates that cases pending in the Court are referred to the Lok Adalats as well as the cases brought before the Lok Adalat even at pre-litigation stage are settled by Lok Adalats and Permanent Lok Adalats. The Lok Adalats and Permanent Lok Adalats have been vested with powers as enumerated under Section 22 of the 1987 Act while deciding a case brought before it. Under the 1987 Act no private legal aid society or non-governmental organisation has been given any role in the settlement of any dispute. 14. The Lok Adalats and Permanent Lok Adalats have been vested with powers as enumerated under Section 22 of the 1987 Act while deciding a case brought before it. Under the 1987 Act no private legal aid society or non-governmental organisation has been given any role in the settlement of any dispute. 14. The question, which arises is that when the private legal aid society and non-governmental organisations have no role to play in settlement of disputes what are the functions, which are to be discharged by such private societies and non governmental organisations. Section 4 of the 1987 Act enumerates the functions of the Central Authority. Sections 4 (e), (j), (k), (I), (m) and (n) are quoted below: "4. Functions of the Central Authority.- The Central Authority shall perform all or any of the following functions, namely: (a ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (b ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (e ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (d ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (e) organise legal aid camps, especially in rural areas, slums or labour colonies with the dual purpose of educating the weaker sections of the society as to their rights as well as encouraging the settlement of disputes through Lok Adalats; (f ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (g ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (n ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (g ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (n ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (j) provide grants-in-aid for specific schemes to various voluntary social service institutions and the State and District Authorities, from out of the amounts placed at its disposal for the implementation of the legal services schemes under the provisions of this Act]; (k) develop, in consultation with the Bar Council of India, programmes for clinical legal education and promote guidance and supervise the establishment and working of legal services clinics in universities, law colleges and other institutions; 1 (I) take appropriate measures for spreading legal literacy and legal awareness amongst the people and, in particular, to educate weaker sections of the society about the rights, benefits and privileges guaranteed by social welfare legislations and other enactments as well as administrative programmes and measures; (m) make special efforts to enlist the support of voluntary social welfare institutions, working at the grass-root level, particularly among the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes, women and rural and urban labour; and (n) co-ordinate and monitor the functioning of [state Authorities, District Authorities, Supreme Court Legal Services Committee, High Court Legal Services Committees, Taluk Legal Services Committees and voluntary social service institutions] and other legal services organisations and give general directions for the proper implementation of the legal services programmes. " 15. Under Section 7 of the 1987 Act the State Authorities are also entrusted with the functions for giving legal service to persons who satisfy the criteria and undertake preventive and strategic legal aid programmes and to perform such other functions as may be fixed by regulation. Legal awareness and organising legal aid programmes are not possible without the support of voluntary welfare social institutions. In fact Section 4 (m) of the 1987 Act specifically enjoins the Central Authority to make special efforts to support voluntary welfare social institutions. Various legal literacy programmes, legal awareness programmes and legal aid are organised with the aid of voluntary social welfare institutions. Thus the role of voluntary social welfare institutions including the legal aid societies is significant under the provisions of the 1587 Act. 16. Various legal literacy programmes, legal awareness programmes and legal aid are organised with the aid of voluntary social welfare institutions. Thus the role of voluntary social welfare institutions including the legal aid societies is significant under the provisions of the 1587 Act. 16. Learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel has brought before us the letter dated 17th July, 1998 of the Member Secretary, National Legal Services Authorities, which has specifically enumerated the functions and duties of Non-Governmental Organisations and Social Action Groups. It is useful to quote the following: "his Lordship, Honble Dr. Justice A. S. Anand, Judge Supreme Court of India and Executing Chairman, National Legal Services Authority, vide his D. O. Letter dated 23rd June, 1998 addressed to Honble Chief Justices Patrons-in-Chief of State Legal Services Authorities had highlighted the importance of legal literacy, legal awareness and publicity for legal aid facilities inasmuch as poor, downtrodden and backward sections of the society cannot reap benefits of their legal rights and legal services being provided to them under the Legal Services. His Lordship is of the kind view that NGOs and Social Action 2 Groups can be immensely helpful in spreading legal literacy and legal awareness amongst the masses in far flung areas including tribal and backward areas. His Lordship has therefore desired that NALSA should take immediate steps for establishing nation wide network of voluntary agencies for spreading legal literacy/legal awareness. In His Lordships opinion State Legal Services Authorities are in a better position to identify and select genuine NGOs and Social Action Groups, which may be willing and properly equipped to support us in this exercise. NALSA is very keen to provide financial support to these NGOs and Social Action Groups by way of giving them grants for legal literacy, legal awareness and publicity campaign, but they should have accreditation from State Legal Services Authorities and their programmes should be monitored and supervised by the Legal Aid functionaries. His Lordship Honble Dr. Justice A. S. Anand is of the considered view that only one NGO/social Action Group should be given accreditation for each district in a State and should be willing to work under direct supervision of the District Legal Services Authority. The applications for grants-in-aid from such acreditated NGO, Social Action Group can be considered by NALSA upon recommendations of State Legal Services Authorities. The applications for grants-in-aid from such acreditated NGO, Social Action Group can be considered by NALSA upon recommendations of State Legal Services Authorities. I am sure you must have already initiated steps to identify such NGOs and Social Action Groups for accreditation. " 17. As noticed from the scheme of the Act and as reiterated in the letter dated 17th July, 1998, NGOs and Social Action Groups are immensely helpful in spreading legal literacy and legal awareness amongst the masses in far flung areas. The financial aid is also provided to legal aid societies only with the above object. The scheme of the 1987 Act does not thus give any indication that legal aid societies and non- governmental organisations have to be referred cases for settlement on the basis of compromise. All settlement ought to have taken place only in the Lok Adalats and Permanent Lok Adalats. However, facilitation of settlement by compromise through legal aid programmes and counselling is not prohibited. Any society is free to provide free legal aid to needy and deserving persons. The present is a case, which is confined to direction to District Magistrate to make reference of the cases. The order dated 23rd January, 2009, which is sought to be quashed, has been issued by the District Magistrate directing that no case be referred to the society, namely, Nishulk Vidhik Sahayata (Legal Aid) Samiti. The District Magistrate has rightly said in the order that the Samiti is not entitled for any such reference. The references are contemplated only to Lok Adalats and Permanent Lok Adalats according to the provisions of the 1987 Act. There is no error in the order dated 23rd June, 2009, which may warrant interference by this Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction. 18. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on a judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Centre of Legal Research and another v. state of Kerala, AIR 1986 SC 1322. The Supreme Court in the above case considered the role of voluntary organisations or Social Action Groups in context of legal aid programmes. The Apex Court laid down that Article 39-Aof the Constitution of India obliged the State to set-up comprehensive and effective legal aid programmes in order to ensure that the operation of the 3 legal system promotes justice on the basis of equality. The Apex Court laid down that Article 39-Aof the Constitution of India obliged the State to set-up comprehensive and effective legal aid programmes in order to ensure that the operation of the 3 legal system promotes justice on the basis of equality. The Supreme Court took the view that the legal aid programmes cannot be successfully infused unless there is a participation of voluntary organisations and Social Action Groups. The Apex Court also held that these groups must be encouraged and supported by the State in operating the legal aid programme. Following observations were made by the Apex Court in the said judgment: ". . . We are therefore definitely of the view that voluntary organisations and social action groups must be encouraged and supported by the State in operating the legal aid programme. It is now acknowledged throughout the country that the legal aid programme which is needed for the purpose of reaching social justice to the people cannot afford to remain confined to the traditional or litigation oriented legal aid programme but it must, taking into account the socio-economic conditions prevailing in the country, adopt a more dynamic posture and take within its sweep what we may call Aid Schemes or the State Legal Aid and Advice Board, but we may make it clear that such voluntary organisation or social action group shall not be under the control or direction or supervision of the State Government or the State Legal Aid and Advice Board because we take the view that voluntary organisations and social action groups operating these programmes should be totally free from any Governmental Control. " 19. The 1987 Act contains provisions for providing financial aid to voluntary organisations and social action groups. The 1987 Act has been enacted to give effect to the object and purpose of Article 39-A of the Constitution. Thus there cannot be any dispute to the proposition laid down by the Apex Court in Centre of Legal Researchs case (supra ). When the 1987 Act provides complete mechanism for settlement of disputes through Lok Adalat and Permanent Lok Adalat, the rights and obligations of the parties and their role have to be found out from the 1987 Act itself. As noticed above, the provisions of the 1987 Act does not contain any indication that the cases have to be referred to voluntary organisations for settlement. As noticed above, the provisions of the 1987 Act does not contain any indication that the cases have to be referred to voluntary organisations for settlement. The settlement of cases have to take place according to the 1987 Act by Lok Adalats and Permanent Lok Adalats, hence the above judgment of the Apex Court does not help the petitioner in the present case. 20. In view of the foregoing discussions, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief as claimed in the writ petition. 21. The writ petition is dismissed subject to observations as made above. 4 .