The Madras High Court addressed the issue of exploitation of junior lawyers by senior lawyers, stating that failure to pay even a minimum stipend amounts to a breach of the junior lawyers' fundamental rights.

The Court remarked that extracting work without payment is exploitation and directly in violation of the fundamental rights enshrined under the Constitution. "The livelihood of these young, brilliant lawyers, who have started their practice with a fond hope, must be encouraged by the senior lawyers, legal fraternity and the Courts," it added.

The Division Bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice C Kumarappan directed the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry to formulate guidelines for establishing a standard minimum payment for junior lawyers engaged by seniors.

"It is brought to our notice that young brilliant lawyers after enrolling themselves as Advocates in Bar council of Tamil Nadu is unable to survive on account of the fact that the senior lawyers / lawyers engaging the services of the these junior lawyers, are not paying even the minimum stipend to meet out their livelihood," the Bench noted.

Citing Section 6 of the Advocates Act of 1961, which mandates that Bar Councils work for the welfare of all registered lawyers, the court emphasized the duty of the Tamil Nadu Bar Council to protect the interests of its registered lawyers. The Court noted the plight of young lawyers who, despite their brilliance and enrollment with the Bar Council, struggle to sustain themselves due to the non-payment of even minimum stipends by senior lawyers.

The Division Bench made these observations while hearing a petition filed by Farida Begum, who highlighted the delay in processing around 200 applications submitted by lawyers seeking benefits under the Tamil Nadu Advocate's Welfare Fund.

Advocate CK Chandraasekar, representing the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, explained that the delay in disbursing benefits was due to the non-release of funds by the Tamil Nadu government and the pending approval of the Welfare Scheme by the Puducherry government.

Expressing concern over the practice of Senior lawyers not compensating their juniors, the Court emphasized that such exploitation could not be tolerated. It stressed the responsibility of the Bar Council to protect the livelihood of junior lawyers by ensuring fair compensation.

"Safeguarding the rights, privilege and interest of the advocates is one of the function of the State Bar Council and therefore, the livelihood of these young lawyers, who have enrolled with great ambitions are also to be protected. In order to protect the livelihood of these young lawyers, Bar Council should ensure that minimum stipend is paid by the lawyers, who all are engaging the services of the young lawyers," the Bench said.

It further said, "Exploitation at no circumstances can be permitted nor be appreciated. Therefore, it is the function of the Bar Council to ensure that the livelihood of these lawyers are protected by fixing minimum stipend to be paid in the event of engaging the services of the junior lawyers, who have enrolled."

Consequently, the Bench directed the Tamil Nadu Bar Council to provide instructions on the matter by June 12.

Furthermore, the Court sought responses from the Tamil Nadu government and Puducherry authorities regarding the eligibility of lawyers for benefits under the scheme, the allocation and release of funds, and other relevant details. "..the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Bar Council has to secure necessary instructions for framing guidelines/instructions for the advocates, who have enrolled in the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry," the Court directed.

Cause Title: Farida Begam v. The Puducherry Government and Others

Appearance:-

Petitioner: Advocate C.Elangovan

Respondent: Advocates A.Tamilvanan (AGP), C.K. Chandrashekar, .S.John J.Raja Singh

Click here to read/download the Order


Justice SM SubramaniamJustice C. KumarappanMadras High CourtAdvocates Act of 1961

Sukriti Mishra