Judgment : 1. With the consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 2. The petitioner seeks for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the communication sent by the respondent namely the Secretary, Trust Committee, Tamil Nadu Advocates Welfare Fund, dated 28.04.2014, communicating the Resolution, dated 05.07.2013 and for a direction to the respondent to continue the petitioner as life member in the Tamil Nadu Advocates' Welfare Fund on 01.08.2012. 3. The petitioner enrolled as an Advocate on the rolls of the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu, on 13.04.2010 with an enrollment No.MS 613/210 and the petitioner is a member of Bar Association, Tiruchirapalli and practicing before the District Court, Tiruchirappalli including the consumer forum. The petitioner remitted a sum of Rs.2,700/-on 01.08.2002 to become a life member of the Tamil Nadu Advocates Welfare Fund by remitting the same in Indian Overseas Bank, District Court Branch, Tiruchirappalli, to the account of the Trust Committee of the Tamil Nadu Advocates Welfare Fund, Chennai, and the same was transmitted to the respondent on the same day together with application for admission to the welfare fund duly counter signed by the President and Secretary of the Tiruchirappalli Bar Association. 4. After about one year and eight months, the respondent by communication, dated 28.04.2014, which was received by the petitioner on 31.05.2014, informed the petitioner stating that the Tamil Nadu Advocates' Welfare Fund Act has been amended and the death benefit under the Act was enhanced from Rs.2,00,000/- to Rs.5,25,000/-with retrospective effect from 08.09.2012 and the Government has also notified the amendment and in the meeting held on 05.07.2013, the Trust Committee resolved that those advocates, who have filed the application on or after 08.09.2012 and paid the admission fee of Rs.1,000/-shall be admitted into the fund and the annual subscription or life subscription as the case may be as per the amended Act shall be collected from them. 5. 5. By relying upon the said resolution, the petitioner was informed that as per their records the petitioner paid the amount of Rs.2,700/-, which was received by the respondent on 10.09.2012 and if he desires to be a life member of the Fund he must pay a sum of Rs.8,300/- within a month from the date of receipt of the letter, failing which the amount paid by the petitioner will be adjusted towards admission fee and annual subscription. The petitioner has challenged the impugned communication sent by the respondent as being arbitrary, unjust and unreasonable. 6. It is submitted by the petitioner that he has remitted the amount of Rs.2,700/- into the account of the respondent and transmitted the demand draft on 01.08.2012, together with the application and in such circumstances, the contention of the respondent that the date of receipt alone will be taken into consideration is not tenable. Further, it is submitted that the resolution passed with retrospective effect is illegal and for all purposes the date of remittance alone ought to be taken into consideration, which shall be for all the purposes the relevant date. 7. The petitioner submitted that in the case of Hairoon Bibi v. The United India Life Insurance, reported in (1946) 2 MLJ 253 , this Court, while considering the word 'remit' held that it does not necessarily mean sending the money by post. The idea of a direct payment in person or by messenger might also be involved regard to the practice or course of dealing with the parties have to be considered to find out what could have been intended. That if the promisee prescribes or sanctions any manner of performance, performance in that manner discharges the obligation of the promisor. 8. Mr.M.Subash Babu, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the petitioner was enrolled on 13.04.2010 before the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry and it is true that the has submitted an application for admission to the Welfare Fund Scheme, dated 01.08.2012, by remitting a sum of Rs.2,500/- towards life subscription and Rs.200/-towards admission fee by way of demand draft, dated 01.08.2012, and the same was received by the Office of the respondent only on 10.09.2012. 9. 9. By referring to Section 15(3) of the Tamil Nadu Advocates' Welfare Fund Act, 1987 (hereinafter, referred to as 'the Act'), it is submitted that every applicant shall pay the admission fee of Rs.200/- along with the application to the account of the Trustee Committee. On receipt of the application, the Trustee Committee shall make enquiry as it deems fit and either admit the applicant to the fund or reject for reasons to be recorded. Therefore, it is submitted that the petitioner has to pay a sum of Rs.200/-for admission and thereafter if the Trustee Committee admits him to the Welfare Scheme, then only he can pay the subscription. 10. By referring to the Resolution passed by the Trustee Committee, dated 05.07.2013 in Resolution No.3 of 2013, it is submitted that those persons, who have applied for admission into the Welfare Fund Scheme before 08.09.2012 on payment of admission fee and life subscription on the pre-amended rate namely Rs.200/- and Rs.2,500/-respectively shall be admitted into the fund. Further, it has been resolved to admit those advocates, who have paid admission fee of Rs.1,000/- and life subscription of Rs.10,000/-on or after 08.09.2012. It is further submitted that the petitioner should remit admission fee of Rs.1,000/- life subscription of Rs.10,000/-and therefore the Trustee Committee has resolved to provisionally admit the petitioner as a member of the fund subject to the condition that the paying the balance amount as well as life subscription as per the amended rates. Further, it is submitted that the actual date of application will be reckoned with only when the office of the Trustee Committee received the application and not the date of demand draft. Therefore, it is submitted that the claim made by the petitioner is not sustainable. 11. Further, it is submitted that before the amendment to the Act, the benefit under the Welfare Act was only Rs.2,00,000/- and after the amendment, it has been enhanced to Rs.5,25,000/-with retrospective effect from 08.09.2012. Therefore, it is submitted that the petitioner should remit the balance amount to be entitled to be a life member of the fund. 12. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials placed on record. 13. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is an enrolled member of the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, having been enrolled on 13.04.2010. 12. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials placed on record. 13. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is an enrolled member of the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, having been enrolled on 13.04.2010. The dispute involved in this case is as to whether the petitioner is liable to pay the enhanced admission fee and life subscription in terms of the Resolution passed by the Trustee Committee of the respondent fixing the cut-off date for admission on and after 08.09.2012. The justification seems to be that the benefits payable under the Scheme has been enhanced from Rs.2,00,000/- to Rs.5,25,000/-with effect from 08.09.2012, therefore, the Trustee Committee has fixed 08.09.2012 as the cut-off date and such of those persons, who have applied for admission to the Welfare Fund Scheme before 08.09.2012 on payment of admission fee and life subscription on the pre-amended rate shall be admitted into the fund. The petitioner's application is dated 01.08.2012, which is evident from the copy of the application filed in the typed set of papers in which the signature and seal of the President and Secretary of the Bar Association are found. The respondent does not dispute the date of the application nor the signature of the President and Secretary of the Tiruchirappalli Bar Association. Their only defence is that the amount was received by them only on 10.09.2012 and therefore the petitioner will be considered as a candidate falling beyond the cut-off date and he has to remit the enhanced admission fee and subscription. 14. The Tamil Nadu Advocates' Welfare Fund Act, 1987 was enacted to provide for payment of retirement benefits to the advocates in the State of Tamil Nadu and for conferring on them the benefits connected therewith or incidental thereto. The Amendment Act, 1990 was enacted to provide for welfare fund for the benefit of the Advocates on cessation of practice and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto in the State of Tamil Nadu. Amendment Act 1992 made it compulsory for every advocate appearing before any Court, Tribunal or other authority to fix the welfare fund stamp on every vaka-latnama to the value of two rupees in addition to the Court Fee stamp affixed therein. 15. Amendment Act 1992 made it compulsory for every advocate appearing before any Court, Tribunal or other authority to fix the welfare fund stamp on every vaka-latnama to the value of two rupees in addition to the Court Fee stamp affixed therein. 15. One of the salient feature of 1995 Amendment Act is to pay the lump sum amount of Rs.1,00,000/- as death benefit to the nominees or the legal heirs of the advocate members and to increase the subscription from Rs.50/- to Rs.100/-for advocates with less than ten years standing, Rs.100/- to Rs.200/- for ten years or more and life subscription of Rs.10,000/-for the designated senior advocates and Rs.2,500/-for other advocates. The value of the stamp to be affixed in the vakalathnama was enhanced from Rs.2/- to Rs.5/- so as to augment the fund. 16. By the Amendment Act, 2000, the death benefit payable to the nominee or legal heir of the member of the Advocates Welfare Fund was increased from Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.2,00,000/-and by the Amendment Act, 2013, the death benefit was increased from Rs.2,00,000/-to Rs.5,25,000/-. 17. Section 2(a) of the Act defines 'advocate' to mean a person whose name has been entered in the roll of advocates prepared and maintained by the Bar Council under Section 17 of the Advocates Act, 1961 and who is a member of a Bar Association or an Advocates Association. 'Advocates Association' has been defined under Section 2(b) of the Act to mean an association of advocates recognized and registered by the Bar Council under Section 13. 'Bar Association' has been defined under Section 2(c) of the Act similar to that of Advocates Association. 'Fund' has been defined under Section 2(g) to mean that the Tamil Nadu Advocates Welfare Fund constituted under Section 3. 18. The Trustee Committee, which has taken the impugned decision, is established under Section 4 of the Act and it shall be a body corporate having perpetual succession and a common seal with power to acquire, hold and dispose of the property and shall by the said name sue and be sued. Section 9 of the Act deals with functions of the Trustee Committee and in terms of Section 9(2) (b), the Trustee Committee shall receive applications for admission or re-admission to the Fund and dispose of such applications within ninety days from the date of receipt thereof. Section 9 of the Act deals with functions of the Trustee Committee and in terms of Section 9(2) (b), the Trustee Committee shall receive applications for admission or re-admission to the Fund and dispose of such applications within ninety days from the date of receipt thereof. In terms of Section 10(2) of the Act, the Trustee Committee shall deposit all moneys and receipts forming part of the Fund in any scheduled bank or invest the same in loans to any Corporation owned or controlled by the Central Government or the State Government or in loans floated by the Central Government or the State Government or in any other manner as the Bar Council may, from time to time, direct with the prior approval of the Government. Section 13 of the Act deals with recognition and registration by Bar Council of any association of Advocates. On such application being made by the association of advocates, in terms of sub-section (3) of Section 13, the Bar Council may, after such enquiry, as it deems necessary, recognize the association and issue a certificate of registration in such form as may be prescribed. 19. Section 14 of the Act deals with duties of Bar Association and Advocates Association. In terms of sub-section (1) of Section 14, the associations are bound to furnish to the Bar Council a list of it's members as on 31st March of that year. Changes with regard to the death or other cessation of practice or voluntary suspension etc., are to be informed in terms of Section 14(2). Section 15 of the Act deals with membership in the fund. In terms of sub-section (1) of Section 15 every advocate practising in any Court in the State and being a member of a Bar Association or an Advocates Association, may apply to the Trustee Committee for admission as a member of the Fund in such form as may be prescribed. The form so prescribed is Form No.III. Under subsection (2) of Section 15 on receipt of an application under sub-section (1), the Trustee Committee shall make such enquiry as it deems fit and either admit the applicant to the fund or for reasons to be recorded in writing, reject the application. In cases of rejection, opportunity of being heard has to be given in terms of the proviso to sub-rule 3 of Section 15. In cases of rejection, opportunity of being heard has to be given in terms of the proviso to sub-rule 3 of Section 15. In terms of subsection (3) of Section 15 of the Act, every applicant shall pay an application fee of Rs.1,000/-along with the application to the account of the Trustee Committee. In terms of sub-section (4) of Section 15, every member of the fund shall pay an annual subscription to the fund on or before the 30th June of every year or a life-time subscription, as per the rates prescribed. 20. It is to be noted that the expression used in sub-section (4) is 'every member of the fund'. 'member of the fund' has been defined under Section 2(i) of the Act to mean an advocate admitted to the benefits of the fund and continuing to be a member thereof under the provisions of the Act. 21. Thus, as per the procedure stipulated under the Act, every applicant is required to pay application fee, which was Rs.200/- and now increased to Rs.1,000/-along with the application to the account of the Trustee Committee. In terms of Section 9(2)(b) of the Act the applications for admission to the fund shall be disposed of within 90 days from the date of receipt. On being admitted to the member of the fund, such member is required to pay the subscription. In the instant, the petitioner remitted a total amount of Rs.2,700/-, of which Rs.200/- towards admission fee and Rs.2,500/- towards life subscription. As per the scheme of the Act, such remittance could not have been made by a single payment, since the subscription is payable only if a member is admitted to the fund and then only he will fall within the definition of the member of the fund as defined under Section 2(i) of the Act. However, in practise the consolidated payment has been accepted therefore the same cannot be put against the petitioner nor it has been cited as a reason for rejecting the petitioner's application for enrolment as a life member of the welfare fund. 22. As per the procedure under the Act, on receipt of the application, it will be scrutinized by the Trustee Committee and a decision has to be taken regarding admission within ninety days from the date of receipt. 22. As per the procedure under the Act, on receipt of the application, it will be scrutinized by the Trustee Committee and a decision has to be taken regarding admission within ninety days from the date of receipt. Admittedly, the respondent did not dispose of the application within the stipulated period of ninety days, but sent the impugned communication based on the resolution passed by the Trustee Committee on 05.07.2013 fixing the cut-off date as 08.09.2012. It is not in dispute that the petitioner's application, dated 01.08.2012 was well before the cut-off date, but the benefit has not been granted to the petitioner stating that the Trustee Committee received his application only on 10.09.2012. In the preceding paragraphs, we have seen the scheme of the Act, which clearly shows that a person eligible to be a member of the fund should be an advocate as defined under Section 2(a) of the Act, which states that a person whose name has been entered in the roll of advocates prepared and maintained by the Bar Council under Section 17 of the Advocates Act, 1961 and who is a member of a Bar Association or an Advocates Association, which are recognized and registered by the Bar Council. Therefore, an advocate cannot make an application directly to the Trustee Committee, but necessarily to be routed through the Bar Association or Advocate Association as the definition itself encompasses such procedure and responsibility. Therefore, for all the purposes, sofar as the applicant is concerned the relevant date should be the date on which the Bar Association accepted the application, as the applicant is precluded from directly submitting the application to the Trustee Committee as per the Scheme of the Act. 23. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that if any interpretation or relaxation is granted to the cut-off date, it would throw upon to several such claims and the respondent would be unable to administer the fund. The apprehension of the respondent is not wholly justified as the interpretation of this Court is not solely dependent upon the said interpretation stating that for all purposes the date of application to the Bar Association alone would be relevant, but, this Court is constrained to observe so in the light of the fact that the demand draft for remittance of the amount was into the account of the respondent which was made on 01.08.2012. Therefore, the application, dated 01.08.2012, having not been disputed and the demand draft had been drawn on 01.08.2012, as on date the amount had been remitted to the account of the Trustee Committee as required under Section 15(3) of the Act, the petitioner's application shall be deemed to have been validly presented as on 01.08.2012 and the date of receipt as recorded by the respondent as 10.09.2012 cannot be the date in sofar as the petitioner's application is concerned. 24. In the result, the writ petition is allowed the impugned communication of the respondent, dated 28.04.2014, is set aside and the respondent is directed to consider and enroll the petitioner as a life member of the Tamil Nadu Advocates Welfare Fund by accepting the petitioners' application fee of Rs.200/- and life subscription of Rs.2,500/-remitted by the petitioner into the account of the Trustee Committee by demand draft, dated 01.08.2012, which is well before the cut-off date fixed by the respondent namely 08.09.2012 and necessary certificate shall be issued to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. No costs.