BALAKRISHNAN NAMBIAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is a public spirited person. He has approached this Court inter alia praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the State Government to review the remuneration of the Government Pleaders and Public Prosecutors in a more systematic and reasonable manner.

(2.) The allegations made by the petitioner, in short, are as follows: All Sessions cases are tried in the Sessions Courts and Assistant Sessions Courts established in the State. Under S.24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the prosecution is to be conducted by Public Prosecutors and Additional Public Prosecutors. As per Clause (7) of S.24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure a person who has been in practice as an Advocate for not less than 7 years alone is eligible to be appointed as Public Prosecutor or Additional Public Prosecutor. The District Collector in consultation with the District and Sessions Judge is to prepare a panel of names of persons who are fit to be appointed as Public Prosecutor or Additional Public Prosecutor in the district. The Government is to appoint persons from among those included in the said panel. Generally the appointment is for a period of three years. The Government have fixed the remunerations to be paid to the Government Law Officers appearing in district courts and sub courts. The said remuneration is ridiculously low. Further, the maximum amount that can be earned by such officers is fixed at Rs. 22 500/- per annum. Government Pleader cum Public Prosecutors appointed in District Court centres and Sub Court centres discharge very responsible duties in conducting civil and criminal cases. Because of the very low remuneration the posts have become unattractive to lawyers who have sufficient work. They are not even paid remuneration at the rate at which it is paid to Government Pleaders working in the High Court. Their remuneration is not paid regularly even. It is delayed for 2 to 3 years even. There were occasions where the Government Pleaders cum Public Prosecutors had to send lawyer's notice for getting their fees. In these circumstances, the petitioner prays that the Government must be directed to revise the remuneration due to Government Pleaders cum Public Prosecutors engaged by the Government to attend to the legal matters in District and Sessions Courts, Sub Courts and Assistant Sessions Courts etc.

(3.) On behalf of the State, a Legal Assistant in the Law Department, Government Secretariat, has sworn to a counter affidavit. That counter affidavit was filed in court on 27-6-1986. While contending that the Government Pleaders working in Subordinate courts cannot be treated on parity with those working in the High court, it is stated that the question of revision of the remuneration to Government Law Officers at District Court, Additional District Court and Sub Court centres is under the active consideration of the Government. As per the counter affidavit only persons having qualification prescribed by the Kerala Government Law Officers (Appointment and Conditions of Services) and Conduct of Cases Rules, 1978, are being appointed as Government Pleaders, that they are being paid in accordance with the provisions contained in the said Rules and that the main reason for the low percentage of conviction in sessions cases is not entirely due to inefficiency of the Public Prosecutors.