The Allahabad High Court has directed the Uttar Pradesh Government to constitute a fresh committee to consider the grievances of Advocates' Clerks and submit recommendations to the State for implementing a welfare policy for them.

In its order passed on August 13, the Court also rejected the recommendations of an earlier committee from January 2021.

A bench of Justice Alok Mathur and Justice Amitabh Kumar Rai found that members of the earlier committee were 'probably' unaware of the functioning, remuneration, duties and particularly, the role of Advocates' Clerks in the administration of justice.

The order was passed in a writ petition filed in 2017 seeking a direction to the State Government to formulate a policy for the welfare of Advocates' Clerks.

The Court also termed the Finance Department's view that the financial liability for such policy would have to be incurred by the State as “clearly arbitrary”.

"Surprisingly, when it is a clear stand of the petitioner that no financial liability is to be incurred by the State, as only a certain amount has to be collected in a particular welfare fund from the tickets/stamps affixed to the Vakalatnama and the corpus so created shall be used for the benefit of the Advocates' Clerks, we find that the views of the Finance Department were clearly arbitrary and bereft of any cogent reasoning", the bench remarked.

About the Petition

The petition, filed by Sushil Kumar Srivastava, sought direction to the State Government to formulate a policy for the benefit of the Advocates' Clerks, whom the petitioner described as a “single class” serving the public and playing an important role in the administration of justice.

The petition stated that Advocates' Clerks perform the secretarial work of lawyers and remain involved with the Registry and Court office from the stage of filing a petition, including obtaining certified copies and removing defects in petitions.

The petitioner had also pointed out that, apart from remuneration received from the advocates with whom they work, Advocates' Clerks generally have no security, medical cover or pension scheme.

It was also stated that their services are ordinarily terminated when they become old or incapacitated, without any benefit.

The petition further referred to welfare provisions made for Advocates' Clerks in several States, including Himachal Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Orissa, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Jharkhand and Telangana.

In November 2022, the State Government informed the Court that it had decided to constitute a committee to examine the issue concerning Advocates' Clerks working across Uttar Pradesh.

The Court had then asked that the matter be brought to the notice of the Advocate General, observing that Advocates's Clerks were “a concomitant part of justice delivery system".

The State considered the issue at a meeting held on January 27, 2021, and its recommendations were submitted to the High Court via an affidavit filed on July 17, 2023.

The earlier committee comprised senior officials from the Law, Finance, Social Welfare and Labour Departments as well as the Chairman of the Uttar Pradesh Bar Council and a Special Secretary in the Law Department.

The Labour Department had suggested that Advocates' Clerks would be entitled to the Pradhan Mantri Shram Yogi Maandhan Yojana, 2019, subject to its eligibility requirements. The Social Welfare Department also referred to certain existing beneficial schemes.

High Court's observations

The High Court, however, was critical of the outcome of the findings of the previous committee, as it observed thus:

"…none of the members had any knowledge with regard to the working of the Advocates' Clerks or the nature of their duties, except the Chairman of the Bar Council, whose recommendations had not even been considered by the committee".

The Court also took exception to the Finance Department's stand that because the said provision would entail financial liability on the State, a policy in this regard would have to be taken by the State Government.

The Court said that no such financial liability would be imposed on the State, as a particular amount could instead be collected into a welfare fund through tickets/stamps affixed to the Vakalatnama, with the resulting corpus used for the benefit of Advocates' Clerks.

Against this backdrop, the High Court rejected the earlier committee's recommendations and directed the State Government to constitute another committee to consider the grievances raised by Advocates' Clerks.

The fresh committee is to comprise:

• The Advocate General of Uttar Pradesh, or an Additional Advocate General with adequate experience at the Bar nominated by him;

• Two Senior Advocates, one each from the Allahabad and Lucknow Benches;

• One member of the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh, nominated by its Chairman; and

• Additional Chief Secretaries of relevant departments, including the Legal Remembrancer, as considered necessary.

The Court directed the Chief Secretary to constitute the committee within four weeks. The committee is to consider the Advocates' Clerks' grievances and submit its recommendations to the State.

The state government has also been asked to place a copy of the recommendations before the High Court by way of an affidavit.

The entire exercise is to be completed within a maximum of three months.

The matter has been directed to be listed on November 23, 2026, among the top ten cases.