VEERARAGHAVAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE common prayer in all these Writ Petitions is to issue a writ of declaration declaring that the proviso to Explanation II (5) to S.16(1) of the Tamil Nadu Advocates Welfare Fund (Amendment) Act, 1995 as null and void being violative of Art.14 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) AS it is felt that common pleading have been put-forth by both the parties aiming at the same object all the four matters have been clubbed together for common disposal.

(3.) LEARNED Senior Counsel for the petitioners would submit that the classification, as such, does not reflect rational nexus to the object sought to be achieved. The object of the Act is to lend succour to the financially needy even after the demise of an Advocate by profession. But, quite unfortunately, the Advocates who had retired from service getting a paltry pension or other retiral benefit as have been unreasonably segregated without verifying their financial status. Therefore, the group identified from the others was not based on intelligible differentia. The Financial criteria was not taken as a norm for classifying a group of Advocates. Therefore, the proviso introduced by the Amendment Act, 1995 has to be struck down as unconstitutional.