ARUN KUMAR UPADHAYA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 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.) 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. 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.