The High Court has clarified that for a Lok Adalat to be legally constituted under Section 18(2) of the J&K Legal Services Authorities Act, it must include at least one serving or retired Judicial Officer. Awards made by a Lok Adalat lacking such a member are void and have no legal sanctity. This judgment affirms and clarifies existing statutory requirements, and is binding within the jurisdiction of the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WP(C)/1374/2022 of MODERN HOTEL SHAKUNTLA COMPLEX PVT LTD TH ROMESH CHANDER MAHAJAN AND ANOTHER Vs RATTAN LAL CNR JKHC020031472022 |
| Date of Registration | 20-06-2022 |
| Decision Date | 01-09-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | Disposed Off |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR |
| Court | High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh at Jammu |
| Bench | Single Judge Bench |
| Precedent Value | Binding within the jurisdiction of the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms statutory requirements under Section 18(2) of the J&K Legal Services Authorities Act |
| Type of Law | Procedural/Statutory Interpretation – Legal Services Authorities Act |
| Questions of Law | Whether awards passed by a Lok Adalat not constituted as per Section 18(2) of the J&K Legal Services Authorities Act are legally valid? |
| Ratio Decidendi | The Court held that a Lok Adalat must necessarily include a serving or retired Judicial Officer as per Section 18(2) of the J&K Legal Services Authorities Act. If so constituted, only then does the Lok Adalat have legal authority to pass awards. Where the Lok Adalat was presided only by an Assistant Labour Commissioner (not a Judicial Officer), its awards are passed by a forum coram non judice, lack legal sanctity, and are void ab initio. Any actions or orders based on such void awards, including execution proceedings, are also unsustainable. The matters must be restored for fresh adjudication before the competent authority. |
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court | Section 18(2) of the J&K Legal Services Authorities Act; interpretation of mandatory statutory requirements for forum constitution. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | Awards under the Payment of Wages Act and Payment of Gratuity Act were made by a Lok Adalat presided by Assistant Labour Commissioner (not a Judicial Officer); these were executed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate. Petitioners challenged the legality of these awards and the subsequent execution order. |
| Citations | Not reportable status; CNR JKHC020031472022 |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts in the jurisdiction of the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts and tribunals dealing with Legal Services Authorities Act compliance |
| Follows | Statutory requirements under Section 18(2) of the J&K Legal Services Authorities Act |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Clarifies that a Lok Adalat must necessarily include at least one serving or retired Judicial Officer as mandated by Section 18(2) of the J&K Legal Services Authorities Act.
- Any Lok Adalat award passed without proper composition (i.e., without a serving/retired Judicial Officer) is void ab initio and unenforceable in law.
- Secondary authorities, such as Assistant Labour Commissioners acting alone, cannot constitute a valid Lok Adalat for the purpose of passing awards.
- Lawyers should scrutinize the composition of Lok Adalats in cases where awards are challenged on jurisdictional or procedural grounds.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The High Court examined Section 18(2) of the J&K Legal Services Authorities Act which mandates the composition of the Lok Adalat to include at least one serving or retired Judicial Officer.
- The impugned awards were passed by a Lok Adalat presided over solely by the Assistant Labour Commissioner who is neither a serving nor a retired Judicial Officer.
- The Court reasoned that awards from a body not legally constituted under the statute are void and amount to proceedings coram non judice.
- The execution proceedings based on such void awards are equally unsustainable.
- The Court quashed both the awards and the orders in execution, remanding the matter for fresh adjudication before the authority in accordance with law.
- The decision reiterates the mandatory nature of the statutory requirement concerning the composition of Lok Adalats.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner:
- The Lok Adalat awards are void because the constitution of the Lok Adalat was not in accordance with law—specifically, it was not presided over by a serving/retired Judicial Officer as required by Section 18(2) of the J&K Legal Services Authorities Act.
- All subsequent proceedings (including execution) based on such void awards are also null.
Factual Background
The case involves three awards made under the Payment of Wages Act and Payment of Gratuity Act by a Lok Adalat in Jammu. The Lok Adalat was presided over by the Assistant Labour Commissioner and not a Judicial Officer. Following these awards, execution proceedings ensued, resulting in attachment warrants against the petitioners’ property. The petitioners challenged both the validity of the awards and the execution order on the grounds of improper constitution of the Lok Adalat.
Statutory Analysis
- Section 18(2) of the J&K Legal Services Authorities Act was interpreted.
- The section specifies that the Lok Adalat must include a serving or retired Judicial Officer and other persons as specified.
- The Court adopted a strict construction, holding the requirement to be mandatory, not directory. Absence of a Judicial Officer in the composition makes any Lok Adalat award void.
Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary
No dissenting or concurring opinions are recorded in the judgment.
Procedural Innovations
- The Court directed prompt disposal of the remanded claims by the Assistant Labour Commissioner within six months, recognizing the age of the claims.
- No new general procedural rules or innovations were propounded.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Judgment affirms the statutory requirement regarding the composition of Lok Adalats under Section 18(2).
Citations
- CNR JKHC020031472022
- Judgment Non-Reportable