ORDER : 1. In this writ petition, the Advocate’s Clerks Association, Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi has prayed for the following reliefs: (a) To hold and declare section 4 & 12 of the Jharkhand Advocates’ Clerks Welfare Fund Act, 2018 (Annexure 4) as notified vide notification no. 07 D/Advocate Clerk’s-17/2020-456/J dated 24.04.2020 and Rule 2€ and 2(f) of the Jharkhand Advocate’s Clerks Welfare Fund Rules, 2020 as Ultra Vires being arbitrary, unreasonable, unjust and also the impugned section/rules are so designed that it had made the concerned Act/Rule unworkable and against the interest of the Advocates Clerks. (b) Upon declaration of the relevant provisions of the Impugned Act/Rule as ultra vires, the Hon’ble Court may be pleased to declare the subsequent actions of the respondents, if any, taken after implementation & execution of the concerned section/rule as bad, illegal and unreasonable. 2. Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that he would not press the prayer with respect to holding and declaring Section 4 of the Jharkhand Advocates’ Clerks Welfare Fund Act, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act” for brevity) as ultra vires. He further submits that he also does not want to press the prayer with respect to declaring Rule 2(e) and 2(f) of the Jharkhand Advocate’s Clerks Welfare Fund rules, 2020 as ultra vires. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the provision of Section 12 of the Act is unreasonable, unfair and arbitrary and it is further submitted by him that it is contrary to the direction given by this Court. 3. For the purpose of better appreciation, we hereby take note of the exact words used by the legislature in Section 12 of the Act: “12. Stamp of Jharkhand Advocates’ Clerk Welfare Fund: (1) There shall be printed or caused to the printed by the Bar Council in such form and in such manner as may be prescribed, stamp inscribed “the Jharkhand Advocates’ Clerk Welfare Fund” each of the value of five rupees. (2) Every Vakalatnama or Memorandum of appearance filed before any Court, authority of tribunal shall affixed with a stamp as specified in sub-section (1) in addition to the Court fee stamps, if any, and stamp to be affixed under any other Acts and no Vakalatnama or Memorandum of appearance shall be valid unless it is so stamped. (2) Every Vakalatnama or Memorandum of appearance filed before any Court, authority of tribunal shall affixed with a stamp as specified in sub-section (1) in addition to the Court fee stamps, if any, and stamp to be affixed under any other Acts and no Vakalatnama or Memorandum of appearance shall be valid unless it is so stamped. Provided that this sub-section shall not apply to any Vakalatnama of Memorandum or appearance filed on behalf of the Central or State Government. (3) The person or authority receiving Vakalatnama with such stamp shall forthwith effect cancellation of the stamp by punching out the same. (4) The custody of the stamps printed under this section shall be with the Bar Council and, the supply and sale of stamps shall be in such manner as may be prescribed.” 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner taking exception of the use of expressions “each of the value of five rupees” has submitted that fixation of five rupees stamp on each case is very low. It is disproportionate to the money that is being transferred to the ‘Advocates’ Association’ fund under the relevant Act. He would further submit that in an earlier application being W.P. (PIL) No. 3347 of 2014 as per the judgment dated 10.05.2017 a Coordinate Bench of this Court has directed that all Vakalatnamas filed in the High Court will bear a seal of the Advocate’s Clerks Association for which the said Association will charge any amount which will not be more than Rs.10/-per seal. Interpreting this direction, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that fixing of Rs.5/-is in the teeth of the order passed by the Division Bench in the aforesaid judgment. 5. However, we are not inclined to agree with the contention raised by the leaned counsel for the petitioner, inasmuch as, the direction given by the Division Bench in the aforesaid Public Interest Litigation is that the seal shall not be more than Rs.10/-. Any enactment which is less than ten rupees will be within the scope and ambit of the order passed by the Division Bench in W.P. (PIL) No. 3347 of 2014. So that part of the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner fails. 6. Any enactment which is less than ten rupees will be within the scope and ambit of the order passed by the Division Bench in W.P. (PIL) No. 3347 of 2014. So that part of the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner fails. 6. So far as the argument on the point of disproportionate money is concerned, we are also not inclined to entertain this writ petition on that count also as it is brought to our notice by the learned A.A.G. that the seal which is being affixed in the Vakalatnama for contribution towards welfare of the Advocates i.e. ‘Advocate Welfare Fund’ is Rs.15/-only. At this, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in every case the petitioner has to deposit a sum of Rs.100/-in the High Court Bar Association. It is not within the scheme of the Advocates’ Welfare Fund as enacted and legislated. 7. Charging of Rs.100/-by the Bar Association is an internal arrangement of Bar Association which is not included in the similar legislation. Moreover, the interest of the litigants has to be considered by us as the foremost interest and in that view of the matter we do not want to overburden the litigants by giving any direction to increase the contribution to the Advocate’s Clerks Association Welfare Fund, Jharkhand High Court. 8. This writ petition is, thus, without merit and the same is hereby dismissed.