RAJANI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, a qualified advocate challenges the constitutional validity of Rule 5a(i) of the Bihar Gram Katchahry Nyaya Mitra (Employment, Service Conditions and Duties) Rules, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) framed in exercise of powers conferred by Section 146 read with Section 94(2) of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Chapter VI of the Act comprising Sections 90 to 122 provides for establishment, powers, duties and procedure of the Gram Katchahry and the benches thereof. Section 90 of the Act provides for establishment of a Gram Katchahry in every Gram Panchayat area for the purpose of discharging the judicial functions imposed upon it. THE said provisions further provide for election of a Sarpanch and the Panches of the Gram Katchahry and appointment of Nyaya Mitra for assisting the Gram Kachahry. Section 92 provides, inter-alia, that every Gram Katchahry shall continue for 5 years and no longer.

(2.) SECTION 94(2) of the Act provides for appointment of Nyaya Mitra to be appointed in the prescribed manner. The eligibility, procedure and other incidental matters for appointment of Nyaya Mitra are provided under the Rules. Rule 5a(i) provides he or she must be a citizen of India and resident of the concerned district of the State of Bihar. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is a qualified law graduate eligible for appointment as a Nyaya Mitra. In the year 2007 or thereabout, she had applied for appointment as Nyaya Mitra in District Shekhpura. Though she was selected she was denied appointment on the ground that she was not the resident of the said district. Feeling aggrieved she has preferred this petition. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. T.N. Maitin, has appeared for the petitioner. He has submitted that Rule 5a(i) of the Rules which restricts the appointment of a Nyaya Mitra to a particular area, is arbitrary and contrary to Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. He has also submitted that the Rule is contrary to Hindu Succession Act also, as the petitioner has a hereditary right in the parental properties at Shekhpura. She, therefore, should be considered to be a resident of District-Shekhpura.