JUDGMENT
S.B. Sanyal and R.N. Lal, JJ.
1. This writ petition has been filed by an Institute said to be engaged in legal seminars, Studies, Research and also to provide legal aid to the needy. Petitioner No. 2 is Incharge of the Legal Section of the Institute to initiate legal action, activities Legal Board of the State Government to meet the needs of the people to get implemented the mandate of the Constitution and Government policy in this regard.
2. The petitioners seek issuance of a writ and/or directions on the State Government and the official respondents to notify the appointment of the Acting Chairman of the Bihar State Legal Board and the Member Secretary of the Board without any delay and to take adequate steps to provide the Bihar Legal Aid Board all facilities in the matter of office accommodation, staff and other establishment to enable it to function effectively. They also pray that the respondents must declare the assets and funds of the Bihar Legal Aid Board and to put at its disposal and further to direct to effectuate the duties and responsibilities cast upon it and enquiry fixing up responsibilities for gross lapses and negligence on the part of the respondents and public servants who are responsible for nullifying the legal aid programme conceived under Article 39-A of the Constitution of India.
3. It has been averred that in the year, 1975 in the State of Bihar a Legal Aid Scheme known as The Bihar State Legal Aid to the poor scheme (hereinafter referred to as the scheme) was started under the Chairmanship of Dr. Jagannath Mishra, the Chief Minister. The scheme was approved by the Cabinet which brought within its wide panorma of legal services, a positive role to be played by the State and volunteery agencies.
4. It appears from the preface of Bihar State Legal Board to the poor Scheme that the progress of the scheme was abruptly disrupted with the coming of the Janta Government in power and there was no tangible progress of the scheme. With the advent Congress Government a new scheme for legal aid was approved covering a wide range of persons whose income does not exceed four thousand rupees as also persons belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and landless persons without any limit of income. The scheme was activitised and revived by constituting various legal aid committees at the High Court level and the district level and is expected to render great help to the poor litigants of the State. Under the scheme a legal aid committee for Patna High Court and Ranchi Bench was conceived of which a retired Judge of the High Court would be the Chairman of the Legal Aid Committee with various other members both for Patna and Ranchi and the life of the committee would be for one year from the date of its constitution. There would be a Legal Aid Board which would be allotted funds as required under Chapter VI for legal aid and legal advice.
5. With the enactment of Article 39-A by the 42nd Amendment of the Constitution of India in the year 1976 requiring the State to secure the operation of the legal system promoting justice, on the basis of equal opportunity and in particular, provide free legal aid by suitable legislation or scheme or any other way to ensure opportunities for securing justice irrespective of economic or other disabilities. The Bihar State Weaker Section Legal Aid Act, 1983 (Bihar Act 2 of 1983) was brought into force, to implement the directive principles of the Constitution of India to extend free legal aid to the weaker section. Section 3 of the Legal Aid Act contemplated constitution of Legal Aid Board of which the Chief Minister would be patron and Minister of Law and Justice to be the President and Acting Judge of the High Court to be nominated by the Chief Justice as Vice-President and the retired Judge of the High Court or retired District Judge to be nominated by the State Government as Acting Chairman. It also provided for different office bearers and representatives to be members of the State Legal Aid Board with a whole time Member Secretary of the rank of District Judge. The term of the office of the members of the Board under Section 3 of the Act was for a period of three years. In ease of any vacancy to the post of Acting Chairman the Secretary department of law and justice shall be the Acting Chairman and the law department of the State Government shall be the administrative department of the Board. Section 5 contemplated subject to the general control of the State Government it would be Board’s duty to take steps to launch legal aid programme for giving free legal aid services to the weaker sections of the society before any courts or public authorities in accordance with any scheme or provisions of rules. The Board shall have full responsibilities for the administration and implementation of the programme and to discharge various functions including allotment of funds to different committees, to control, regulate and supervise the working of different committees, lay down principles for these committees for efficient discharge of duties and functions and to call for the report, returns, information from different committees in this regard. It also contemplated to carry out legal and judicial surveys and investigation into circumstances of life to apprise themselves of the problems and difficulties of the weaker sections to organise legal aid camps for the purpose of extending legal aid to arrange for camp Court at different places, to establish legal aid centres, to prepare cadre for para legal services to organise seminars, to recommend reforms in courts working, to determine how far and to what extent social legislations would be able to fulfil the object and purpose for which they have been promulgated and all other activities incidental and subsidiary to the objects of the programme of legal aid service. These are only few of the functions enumerated under Section 5(2) of the Act. Section 6 of the Act envisaged constitution of an executive committee of the Board which shall consist of President, Vice-President, Acting Chairman, Secretary, Department of law and justice, Chairman State Bar Council a lady representative of the Board and one Member-Secretary. This committee will be executive organ of the Board and shall be subject to the directions issued from time to time by the Board exercise all the powers and discharge all the functions of the Board. The Acting Chairman of the Executive Committee who may be a retired Judge of the High Court or a retired District Judge be paid honorarium which after adding the sum of honorarium to his pension shall not exceed the last pay drawn No member other than the Member-Secretary shall be entitled to any remuneration who shall be an officer of the rank of District Judge appointed in consultation with the Chief Justice of High Court, Vice-Chairman and Acting Chairman. The members, however, shall be entitled travelling allowance and daily allowance according to service rules applicable to them. The staff sanctioned for the Board shall be under the administrative control of the Executive Committee. The State Government shall provide grant from time to time for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of the Act. The Board is further required to constitute legal Aid Board in District and Subdivisional headquarters and the term of the committee shall be for three years from its constitution. At the district level the District and Sessions Judge will be the Chairman and the District Magistrate as Vice-Chairman. Sections 17, 18 and 19 envisaged persons entitled to legal aid, matters in which legal aid may be given and mode of making available legal aid.
6. Under the scheme Mr. Justice C. N. Tiwary, a retired Judge of Patna High Court, was appointed as Chairman of the Board. It is stated in paragraph 6 of the writ petition that the Chairman functioned without any infra structure like its own separate office or secretary or staff and his term of service came to an end on 21st of July, 1986. Thereafter, neither under the scheme nor under the Act any Acting Chairman was appointed till this date constituting the Legal Aid Board, who is also a member of the Executive Committee but the Secretary department of law and justice who is supposed to be a stop gap arrangement under Section 3(2) in case of vacancy continue to act as the Acting Chairman for almost a full term of three years and the law department of the State Government as administrative department of the Board. It has been averred in the writ petition that the implementation of the Act was wholly superficial and even though the duties and responsibilities cast on the Acting Chairman was arduous and various, work is supposed to be taken from persons engaged in their own busy duties by providing “extra monthly allowances for doing the work of legal Aid Board which created vested interest and they never permitted the legal Aid Board to grow to its own shape and form”. It has been averred in paragraph 8 of the writ petition that till now the State Legal Aid Board is not functioning inspite of the provisions of the Act and no Chairman has been appointed after expiry of the term of Mr. Justice C. N. Tiwary in the year 1986 nor a Vice-President and Member-Secretary.
7. On 9.6.1988 the State Government took a cabinet decision and resolved to appoint one of the Hon’ble Judges on the post of the Chairman and it is stated that no notification was made despite the wish of the law Minister on the plea that there is no sanctioned post inspite of the provision of the Act as also the expected applicability of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, a Central Act, which also makes provision for appointment of the Chairman at the State level from amongst retired or working Judges of the High Court, the notification of the cabinet decision dated 9.6.1988 was not made nor Bihar Legal Aid Board was properly constituted to carry out the duties and responsibilities conferred under the Act even though the said Central Act has not been applied to the State as yet nor rules thereunder have been framed. The writ petitioners have called upon the respondents to produce all records and papers since, 1975, including the assets of the Board, the place where office is held and other details of its functioning to demostrate how the noble cause has remained frustrated all these years. In the writ petition illustrations have been given how poor persons in real need of legal aid to vindicate their grievances had to move this Court in writ jurisdiction for direction to the Government to provide legal remedy and how some of those actions failed because of malfunctioning or non-functioning of the Legal Board. It is said that the respondents have made a mockery of the directive principles of the Constitution and the other objectives of the Act. The Act and the schemes have been a total casualty because of “machinations and capricus of over ambitions and self-serving individuals which is attributable to the culpable negligence on the part of the official respondents”.
8. A Supplementary affidavit has also been filed stating to the effect that from the very inception of the scheme the respondents had failed to provide whole time Member Secretary and for the last three years they have failed to nominate Acting Chairman resulting object frustration of the purpose of the scheme and the Act. It has been averred that the respondents have failed to provide any staff with the result that the scheme and the Act have turned abortive. There is no infrastructure of the Board which the respondents are mandated under the law to provide. The entire Act is under the management of the provisions as for temporary arrangement as envisaged under Section 3(3) of the Act.
9. Counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Secretary, Law Department, where it has been stated that the State Government has allotted fund for legal Aid Committee. A chart has been enclosed (Annexure-A) as to how the money has been spent. It appears that in the year, 1983-84 whereas the legal aid was fifty two thousand and odd, the office expenses was more than fifty two thousand. In the year 1984-85 Thirty five thousand and odd was the legal aid as against office expenses of seventy thousand and add and forty three thousand by way of salary. In the year 1985-86 the legal aid was approximately one lac and sixty nine thousand whereas the office expenses was one Iac and eighty seven thousand with forty three thousand by way of salary and dearness allowance. In the year 1986-87 the legal aid was two lacs and twelve thousand whereas the office expense was one lac and sixty one thousand with forty six thousand by way of salary and fifty thousand dearness allowances and similarly in the year 1987-88 two lacs was for the legal aid but the office expenses was one lac and thirteen thousand and sixty thousand by way of salary. During the year 86 to 88 there was no Acting Chairman,
10. It has further been stated that the matter with regard to appointment of the Executive Chairman is under active consideration of the Government. (It may be stated here that the expression Acting Chairman stands for Karyakari Chairman, namely, Executive or working Chairman). On 16.1.1989 it has been decided by the Cabinet “that the matter with regard to the appointment will be taken up in accordance with the procedure and the matter be placed thereafter”. Allegation with regard to superficial implementation of the Act and scheme has been denied. The illustrative cases cited in the writ petition are not genuine cases for legal aid. However, in the counter-affidavit of respondent No. 2 there is no reply to the averment made in paragraph 7 of the writ petition nor a word about cabinet decision dated 9.6.1988. Respondent No. 2 has also filed show cause stating that he was appointed as law Secretary in the month of March, 1987 and, as such, took some time to acquaint himself with the function of the department. He has further stated that since the Central Act has been passed by both the houses of the Parliament, the Bihar Legal Board was allowed to continue without the filling up the post of the members and office bearers and it was kept in abeyance till the enforcement of the Central Act. This decision was taken on the 24th of September, 1987. In the meanwhile, respondent initiated the proposal for filling up the vacancy of the post of the Vice-President of the Board and requested the Hon’ble High Court to recommend the name of a sitting Judge for the said post and the High Court nominated a sitting Judge for the post of Vice-President but by the time he could be appointed the Judge retired in February, 1988. Therefore, the Law Minister proposed the appointment of an Executive Chairman of the Board on 12.2.1988. The Council of Ministers in the State in the meanwhile was dissolved and on its re-constitution the relevant proposal was sent to the Minister of Law for obtaining order of the Hon’ble the Chief Minister for the said appointment. The Cabinet approved the proposal of the Law Minister as also the incumbent to be appointed as Acting Chairman. The date of Cabinet decision in this regard is not mentioned. It is further said that as the post of the Executive (Acting) Chairman had already expired on 21.7.1986 before the Respondent No. 2 joined as Law Secretary he Initiate a proposal on 8.3.1988 for the extension of the post so that the appointment of the Executive/Acting Chairman could be notified. The file thereafter moved from law department to finance department and the finance department agreed to the proposal of extension of the post till 7.8.1988 and the file was received in the law department on 13.10.1988. As the file was received in the law department when the extension of the post had already expired, the file was returned by the Cabinet and a fresh memorandum was prepared which was received from the office of the Minister on 26.12.1988 and ultimately on 16.1.1989 Cabinet approved the proposal for extention of the term of the post of Executive Chairman till 28.2.1989. It is stated that the decision regarding appointment of Executive Chairman was asked to be put up separately after following the prescribed procedure and the law department was directed to take steps in this regard. It is, thus, said that Respondent No. 2 has never tried to delay the issuance of the notification persuant to the decision of the Cabinet taken on 9.6.1988.
11. A rejoinder has been filed by the petitioner that the official respondents did not allow implementation of the Cabinet decision dated .9.6.1988 by tossing the file between Finance and law department and the departments agreed to extend the post on 7,10.1988 and that too for four months only, i.e., 21.2.1989 which was approved by the Cabinet on 18.1.1989.
12. In paragraph-9 of the rejoinder mala fide has been alleged inasmuch as though notice of the case was received in October, 1988 the respondents stated to have “collusively conspired to attempt to interfere with the process of law and justice by adopting a strange modus operandi by goading and taking a decision in the matter of consideration of extension of the post and not to notify the appointment which under the law is made for three years, when the same matter was pending before the Hon’ble High Court for decision.
13. Supplementary counter-affidavit has also been filed by respondent No. 2 wherein it has been averred that the appointment of the Executive Chairman is under active consideration and the final decision is likely to be taken within short time. It is also stated that the appointment could not be finalised because the term of office is to expire on 28.2.1989. It has further been stated that because Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 has been enacted and as it is likely to come into force in this State, it was not thought proper to extend the term for making the appointment for longer period as after coming into force of the Central Act, such appointment etc. will have to be inconformity with the provisions of the Central Act.
14. As to the decision taken by the Cabinet on 9-6-88 for filling up the post of Executive Chairman the Supplementary counter-affidavit states as hereunder :
that it is true that a decision had been taken in the Cabinet meeting held on 9-6-1988 regarding appointment on the post of the Executive Chairman. However, when the proposal regarding extention of the term of the office was submitted the Cabinet took a decision on 16-1-1989 that proposal regarding appointment on the said post, as well as its terms and conditions, be submitted separately. It is submitted that the decision of the Cabinet dated 9-6-1988 was never communicated and was only in the file. It is submitted that an uncommunicated decision in the file cannot amount to a Government order and cannot create any legal right in favour of any person so as to entitle him to writ of mandamus.
15. In reply to this the petitioners stated in their supplementary affidavit to the rejoinder “that the respondents on various dates from October, 1988 generally and on two dates specifically; once before the Bench of Mr. Justice B. P. Sinha and Mr. Justice C. C. Mookherjee and, then, before the Bench of Mr. Justice S. E. Sanyal and Mr. Justice R. N. Lal admitted that in the Cabinet meeting on 16-1-1989 the proposal regarding appointment of Acting/Executive Chairman was not put up for consideration but out of misapprehension while considering the proposal for extension of the post of the Acting/Executive Chairman, the matter of appointment to the said office was also incorporated although no such proposal had been placed before the Cabinet as required under the law and the same is in the process of rectification but from the written averment in supplementary counter-affidavit, para No. 3 it appears that the assurance to this Hon’ble Court was a mere camouflage to hoodwink this Hon’ble Court.
16. Before we consider the submission of learned counsel for the parties we would like to state here and now that M. S. N. Jha, learned Standing counsel has faily submitted that the memorandum which was forwarded to the Cabinet after consultation with the Finance Department and the approval of the Law Minister, was only for post facto sanction of the post of the Acting Chairman from 21-7-1986 to 29-2-1988 and 1-34988 to 28-2-1989 since during all these periods the post remained unsanctioned. The Cabinet agreed to the memorandum by giving post facto sanction of the post of Acting Chairman but at the same time asked the Law Department to submit a memorandum separately for filing up the post of Acting Chairman, even though Cabinet decision does not show that there was any express orders recalling its earlier decision taken on 9-6-1988 in this regard. According to the learned Standing Counsel, the post of Acting Chairman expired on 21-7-1986 and thereafter the post was never sanctioned nor any person was appointed as the Acting Chairman or Member Secretary. Mr. Jha admits that in the counter-affidavit whereever expression “Executive Chairman” appears it is really meant for Acting Chairman as prescribed under the Act. During all this period when the post of Acting Chairman was not sanctioned nor the whole time Member Secretary was appointed under Section 9 of the Act, the Secretary, Law Department, exercised power conferred under Section 3(2) and continued to hold the post of Acting Chairman and the Deputy Secretary, Law as its Secretary.
17. Section 3(2) of the Act envisages the Secretary, Department of Law, to act as an Acting Chairman when the post of Acting Chairman lies vacant and not when the post is non-existent by virtue of there being no sanction for the post. Further, we do not find any provision under the Act which authorises the Deputy Secretary of the Law Department to act as a Member-Secretary of the Board rather Section 9 of the Act requires the Member-Secretary to be a whole time Judicial Officer of the rank in consultation with the Chief Justice of High Court, Vice President and Acting Chairman. There is no provision in the whole of the Act that in the event of any vacancy to the post of whole time Member-Secretary, the Deputy Secretary, Law Department, ipso facto becomes Member Secretary, The Acting Chairman or working Chairman is the hub of the wheel and it is he who and at whose instance the machinery provided under the Act operates. Since there was no Vice President and Acting Chairman, consequently, Member Secretary who executes the work was never appointed. It will, therefore, appear that almost for more than two and a half years there was neither a post of Acting Chairman duly sanctioned nor a Member Secretary duly appointed but the Act it is claimed operated effectively, efficiently and actively by the State Government. A strange claim meant for our consumption. But for the post facto sanction on 16-1-1989 of the post of Acting Chairman, the acting and dealing of the Secretary, Law Department in the capacity of Acting Chairman under the Act would have been void and without jurisdiction and all acts done by him would have been illegal. Still much debate is even now permissible as to his right to act as acting Chairman since after sanction of the post no person has vacated the office so as to enable him to fill the vacancy under Section 3(2) of the Act as a stop-gap measure. Further, how could the Law Secretary or for that matter the Government appoint out of its own will the Deputy Secretary, Law, as the Member Secretary. It is not known whether any reference in this regard was made to the Chief Justice.
18. For the present, we are not concerned in this writ petition to fix responsibilities for failure of the due implementation and operation of the Act bearing in view its urgent need and laudable objectives to ameliorate the condition of the weaker section of the people by taking justice to their door steps. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the State Government with much fan fare and tall claim introduced the scheme of the legal aid which they professed was a fatality during the Janata regime, the scheme of legal Aid and equality before law equally remained a casualty in the hands of the present Government. It is like introducing a flight without a pilot and launching a ship without a captain. For all these years neither a Vice President who is supposed to be a sitting Judge of the High Court nor an Acting Chairman/Working Chairman who is supposed to be a retired Judge of the High Court nor a Member Secretary of the rank of District Judge could be appointed. The argument of the petitioner’s counsel, therefore, seems to have substance.
19. On mere perusal of the scheme of the Act it is manifest that the post of Acting Chairman or Working Chairman and the Member Secretary are two most important offices under the Act. The onerous and various duties and responsibilities cast upon them under Section 5 of the Act, require whole time Secretary and whole time Chairman. These responsibilities obviously cannot be discharged by a busy officer like Law Secretary by way of additional duties. In the very nature of things, the Act is bound to be a casualty at their hands and we are constrained to observe that the objectives of the Act has largely been frustrated in absence of whole time Acting Chairman, Member Secretary and other infra-structure.
20. The reasons assigned by the learned Standing Counsel for not filling up the post are two folds :-(a) The State Government was expecting the application of Central Act, namely, the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 to the State assented to by the President on 12th October, 1987; and (b) The post remained unsanctioned avaiting the sanction of the post and the concurrence of the Finance Department in this regard. Both the submissions of the learned standing counsel do not appeal to us apart from being contradictory and confusing inasmuch as in February 1988 steps for filling up the post was taken by the Government. As far as the Central Act is concerned, it does not apply ipso facto to a State unless it is made applicable by a notification of the Central Government, and that too different dates for different provisions of the Act. We are, however, told that the Rules under the Act have not yet been framed. The predominant objective of the Central Act is for effective monitoring of legal aid programme at national, state and district level as the implementation of legal aid is a constitutional mandate. Therefore, the Government’s failure to take decision earlier on retirement of Justice C. N. Tiwary on 21-74986 on this pretext does not appear to be justified. Further under Chapter-Ill of the Central Act, State Legal Service Authorities are required to be constituted of which the minimum qualification of the Chairman would be a retired Judge of the High Court and the Law Secretary or Judicial Secretary as the Member Secretary of the State authority. The term of office would be as prescribed by the State Government. It will, therefore, be observed that the minimum qualification to hold the post of Chairman under both the Acts are the same. The second limb of the argument of Mr. Jha that the post of Acting Chairman was not sanctioned and the concurrence of the Finance Department was required for the same is equally groundless. The post has been created under an Act of the legislature and therefore, sanctioned by the legislature, neither the Cabinet nor the Finance Department could have any say in the matter. The post will continue till the life time of the Act as desired by the legislature. The Finance Department and executive wing dealing with the Finance of the State is similarly mandated by the legislature to obey the mandate and provide funds for the post of Acting Chairman and the Member Secretary which has been fixed under Sections 7 and 9 of the Act itself. The so called exercise by the Finance Department is, therefore, only formal in nature. It is common knowledge that whenever a Bill is introduced having some financial implications Finance Department is always taken into confidence before the introduction of the Bill. The Finance Department, therefore, after the promulgation of the Act has merely to obey the mandate of the legislature. Almost the three valuable years were wasted by the Law Department and the Finance Department in tossing the file from one Department to the other on the pretext of sanction is wholly unjusticefied. The entire gymnastic by these two Departments in disregard of the constitutional and statutory mandate led the laudable objectives of the Act frozen in Cold Storage,
21. Learned counsel for the State has not been able to place any convincing argument why the Cabinet decision dated 9-6-1988 could not be notified since it was better late than never. If it is the argument that it could not be so done, because the post was not sanctioned, we feel no justification in that event how the Law Secretary acted as the Acting Chairman during all these days because ‘in case of any vacancy to the post of Acting Chairman Secretary of the Law Department shall be acting Chairman.’ If the post is not sanctioned as is the argument, there could be no question of any vacancy. We think it is for this reason only the Cabinet took a decision to fill up the post but the two erring Departments, namely, the Law & Finance appear to have created hurdle in this regard. This submission appears to be only an excuse on the part of the respondents for their failure to discharge duties cast upon them under the Act’ and Article 39-A of the Constitution of India. Learned Standing Counsel yet tried to justify the non-notification of the decision of the Cabinet dated 9-6-1988 on the legal ground that no legal right flows from such a decision unless the cabinet decision is communicated to the parties in whose favour the right is created. In support of this submission he has relied upon a decision (Bichitra Singh v. The State of Punjab). In our opinion, this decision is not applicable to the facts of the case, because nobody claiming to have been conferred any right by the Cabinet decision has approached this Court. We have been approached by an organisation deeply engaged in rendering social and judicial services for securing justice and equal opportunity to the needy. They have approached the court for mandamising the State to carry out the objectives and obligation of Article 39-A of the Constitution of India as well as the mandate of the Act, introduced with tall claims. We think the petitioners are entitled to ask this Court to issue directions sought for in this writ petition for proper implementation of the provisions of the Act and to carry out the purposes of the Act in true sense and spirit and not to scuttle it by resort to any pretences and/or treat the constitutional directives as an empty slogan.
22. As to the Cabinet decision dated 16-1-1989 we have a feeling that the second part of the decision has been made inadvertently. It might not have been pointed out, the exercise directed has already been gone through long before. Had the Cabinet been aware that they had taken a decision in this regard after a full consideration of the matter as indicated in paragraph No. 6 of the show cause of respondent No. 2 there could be no need of a fresh proposal particularly when the extension period is to expire almost within a month i. e. 28th February, 1989. It has been stated in the reply to the counter-affidavit that there was some submissions before the other Bench that the steps are being taken for rectifying the mistake in this regard. We, however, need not go into that question but observe that the memorandum submitted to the Cabinet in consultation with the Law Minister and Finance Secretary was merely for sanctioning of the post and nothing more and, therefore, the decision of the Cabinet was expected to have been confined to that only. We are not, for a moment, doubting the power of the Cabinet to review, recall or modify their own decision but there is no such indication in the order compelling them to recall or modify their own earlier decision validly taken. We feel the direction of the Cabinet in this regard must have been inadvertently made for which rectification steps as earlier contended on behalf of the respondent is being taken.
23. We are of the opinion that the Act must be fully implemented with all its machinery as envisaged under the Act and no ad hoc arrangement can any more be permitted as is usual in every sphere of life in this State. There must be a full time Acting Chairman without a moment’s delay as also Member Secretary appointed in consultation with the persons noticed under Section 9 of the Act to carry out the mandate of the constitution. The purpose of the Act has been jeopardised for long and the courts cannot sit helpless in the matter and sit idle allowing the Act to be frustrated, any further for the exercise of idle gymnastics and formalities. The illustrative cases in the writ petition showing how needy people are denied justice and are subject matter of gross exploitation compelling them to move this Court for direction of legal aid is telling and pathetic,
24. We, therefore, issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to notify the Cabinet decision dated 9-6-1988 immediately and not beyond 23rd of February, 1989. for a term of three years as envisaged under the Act or till such time the Central Act and rules made thereunder is made applicable to the State, whichever is earlier. It will be, however, open to the State to adopt the functionaries of the State Act in the event of Central Act is made applicable so far it is in conformity with the Central Act. The State is further directed to take all and adequate steps to provide the Bihar Legal Aid Board facilities of office accommodation, staff and other establishment to enable it to function effectively and be able efficiently to discharge the duties and responsibilities required of the Legal Aid Board and its functionaries, in order to kindle a hope in the weaker section of the people clamouring for justice or redressal of their genuine grievances and bring justice to their door steps. The official respondents are ordered to extend all assistance in this regard without creating any impediment and hurdle for efficient functioning of the Legal Board, so that a day may come when the people of the State may feel proud of their achievements in carrying out successfully the mandate of Article 39-A of the Indian Constitution.
In the result the writ petition is allowed at the stage of submission with the aforesaid directions and orders, but there will be no order for costs.