IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.12111 of 2001 1. RAVI SHANKAR SINGH son of Late Mangal Singh 2. Kishore Kumar Pathak son of late Janardan Pathak 3. Shudha Shankar Srivastava son of late Babulal Prasad 4. Md. Ali son of late Zainul Abedin. All presently advocates, Gopalganj Civil Court, Gopalganj, P. O. & District- Gopalganj. … Petitioners Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. District and Sessions Judge, Gopalganj 3. Shashi Bhushan, son of Shri Tripurari Sharan Sharma, resident of village- Madhopur Garh, P. O. Madhopur Garh district- Nalanda. 4. Javed Akhtar son of Shri Anwar Ahmad of village- Mohammadabad, P. O.- Barhariya, District- Siwan. 5. Anil Kumar Tiwari son of Chandra Bhushan Tiwari, resident of Adhiwakta Nagar, P. O. & P. S. Gopalganj, District Gopalganj. 6. Saheb Kumar Sah, son of Shri Uma Shankar Sah, village Jadupur, P. O. Matiyari, P. S. Baikunthpur, District Gopalganj. 7. Devendra Pandey, son of late Ram Agya Pandey, resident of village Dighawa, P. S. Dighawa, Dubouli, P. S. Baikunthpur, District- Gopalganj. 8. Ashok Kumar Pandey, son of Sunil Pandey, resident of village Usari, P. O. Usari Bazar, P. S. Baikunthpur, District Gopalganj. 9. Surendra Prasad, son of Sri Raghunath Prasad, resident of village- Dighwa Kachahari Tola, P. O. Dighwa Dubauli, P. S. Baikunthpur, District Gopalganj. 10.Nurool Abideen son of Sk. Ahsanullah, resident of Mahuwa, P. O. – Sasamusa, P. S. Kuchai Kot, District Gopalganj. 11.Jeetendra Kumar Pandey son of Jai Karan Pandey, resident of village- Rajwahi, P. O. – Rajwahi, District Gopalganj. 12.Kundan Kumar son of Bhuwaneshwar Singh, resident of village- Soneya, Ward No. 13, P. O. P. S. & District- Gopalganj. 13.Jai Prakash Singh, son of Madhav Prasad Singh, resident of village Katalpur, P. S. Baikunthpur, District Gopalganj. All presently advocates, at Gopalganj Civil Court, Gopalganj. 14. The Secretary, Science and Technology, Govt. of Bihar at Patna. … Respondents. - 2 - For the petitioner .. Sri. Shashi Shekhar Dvivedi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ravi Shankar Dvivedi, Adv. For the State .. Mr. A. K. Pandey, G. A. VII Mr. Chandra Shekhar Singh, AC to G.A.VII For the respondents. Mr. Sri Manan Kumar Mishra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vishwajeet Kumar Mishra, Adv. Mr. Awanish Kumar Pandey, Adv. Mr. Prabhakar Dwivedi, Adv. Mr. Nand Baush Nr. Singh, Adv. 9 09.09.2009. In this writ application the petitioners have made prayed for the following relief:- "That, this application is being filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing order no. 36 A dated 17.3.2001 passed by Respondent no. 2 as contained in Annexure-1, as well as order no. 122 A of 2001 dated 19.7.2001 passed by Respondent No. 2 as contained in Annexure-2, whereby the order as contained in Annexure-1 has been re- affirmed and reiterated, and/or for grant of such other relief and reliefs for the grant of such other petitioners may be deemed entitled to." This Court by an interim order dated 18.10.2001 had stayed the operation of impugned order as contained in Annexure-1. Later on this court had heard the matter on several dates and if this context it would be useful to quote one of such order dated 9.4.2009 giving complete insight to the issues - 3 - involved in this writ application, which reads as follows:- “………………Reference may be made to the earlier order of this Court dated 31.3.2009 relevant portion whereof reads as follows : - “The only question which arises for consideration in this case is with regard to empanelment of Pleader Commissioner in terms of Rule 158 of the Civil Court Rules. Respondent no.2, the District and Sessions Judge, Gopalganj seems to have filed counter affidavit, copy whereof is not on record nor the same has been served on the counsel for the petitioner. Counsel for the State in such circumstances prays for and is allowed one week time to file a copy of the counter affidavit of respondent no.2. In the meantime, Registrar General of this Court is also directed to produce a copy of this Court’s letter No. 4968/Adm. (Misc.)/XXXVII-1-90 dated 7.7.2001 pertaining to empanelment of Survey Knowing Pleader Commissioner in the judgeship of Saran at Chapra.” Counsel for the petitioner prays for and is permitted to add Secretary, Science and Technology, Government of Bihar as respondent no. 14 to this writ application. Counsel for the State prays for and is allowed four weeks time to file exhaustive counter affidavit not only on behalf of respondent no. 2 but also on behalf of newly added respondent no. 14. Such counter affidavit must address with regard to all - 4 - the issues raised in this writ application including the existence and continuance of the gazette Notification mentioned in Rule 158 of the Civil Courts Rules as also about the Constitution, power and function and present status of Pleader Survey Examination Board (Bihar & Orissa). While filing such counter affidavit the respondent no. 14 shall also be under obligation to produce Government notification no. 2088-J dated 27th July, 1938 on the basis of which Pleader Survey Examination Board (Bihar & Orissa) has been conducted such examination. All these queries are being made by this Court in view of stand taken by counsel for the petitioner in terms of Rule 158(I) of Civil Court Rules that unless and until an Advocate/Pleader passes examination of Pleader Survey Training Course from Pleader Survey Examination Board he cannot claim inclusion of his name in the list to be prepared by the District Judge for being included in the list of Pleader Commissioner. Such argument, in fact, if accepted would make Rule 158 (II) of the Civil Courts Rules redundant, and in that case recognition of equivalency or higher qualification will have no meaning. It is a well settled principle of law that no part of statute can be held to be redundant. The Registrar General of this High Court is also directed to place on record a self comprehensive note on this issue so that there may not be any divergence of the opinion among the District Judges in preparation of panel for the Pleader Commissioner in terms of Rule 158 of Civil - 5 - Court Rules.” In the light of earlier orders, learned Advocate General has produced a communication of the Director of Science of Technology Department dated 19.8.2009 wherein it has been conveyed that NIT, Patna has now agreed to conduct the course for training of Pleader Commissioner and such session thereafter would commence shortly in near future on a regular basis. Letter of NIT dated 20.8.2009 is also on record of this case which reads as follows:- “To The Director, Science and Technology Department Bihar Govt. Technology Bhawan, Bailey Road Patna-800001 Sub:- Starting of training course for “Survey knowing pleaders Commisioners”. Dear Sir, Kindly refer to your letter No. 2281 dated 19.8.2009 regarding the subject mentioned above. In this respect based on the report of HOD (CED), it is stated that the department is ready to start the above mentioned course in Nov/Dec. 2009 with minimum of 60 admissions. The application for this course will be invited in Sept./Oct.2009. The fee for this course will be Rs.2500/- (Two thousand five hundred only) per student for training course and Rs.500/-(Rs. - 6 - five hundred only), examination fee as agreed upon in 2005. However, NIT Patna being an Institute of national importance is mainly engaged in high level teachings and research, ant it will be better if such courses are run by State Govt. technical institutions. (Dr. K.S.P. Singh) Director I/C” It thus, now seems to be possible to get trained Pleader Commissioners and therefore the grievance of the writ petitioners can be redressed without complicating this issue which is virtually vexing all the Civil Courts in the State of Bihar. Considering all these aspects as also noted in the earlier order of this Court dated 31.3.2009 and 9.4.2009, this Court would dispose of the present writ applications by giving following directions:- (i) The Advocate Commissioner nominated by District and Sessions Judge, Gopalganj namely respondent nos. 3 to 13 shall not work as advocate commissioner till they would successfully complete the course now sought to be conducted and completed under training programme of National Institute of Technology. However, as soon as they are declared to have passed the said training examination they would qualify for the post of advocate commissioner in terms of the impugned order. - 7 - (ii) In order to facilitate the smooth work of Civil Court of Gopalganj and its subordinate courts which apparently has paucity of advocate commissioner, this Court would direct the respondent State as also the Director of National Institute of Technology to take admission of respondents no. 3 to 13 in the first batch of 60 trainees subject to their depositing of course fees. Those among respondent nos. 3 to 13 will not join the course in first batch and/or will not successfully complete such course stand deprived of their chance to work on the post of advocate commissioner in terms of order of District and Sessions Judge, Gopalganj. (iii)The Chairman of the Bar Council presently the office held by learned Advocate General himself, will in consultation with the respective advocate associations submit a list to the State Government for filling the rest of 60 seats in the first session. Thereafter it would be responsibility of the State Bar Council to evolve a uniform mode for sponsoring the name of advocates for undergo training in the NIT Patna. The Bar Council therefore would however ensure that the principle of seniority (length of practice) among the willing advocates who may desire to undergo training programme is strictly followed. (iv) The Director, NIT will also ensure the highest standard of competence while imparting training and declaring the - 8 - Advocates to have completed such training course successfully because it is only the advocates who would pass the final examination completed at the end of six months training in NIT would be qualified to do the job of Advocate Commissioner/Pleader Commissioner in various civil courts. With the aforementioned observations and directions, this application is finally disposed of. Let a copy of this order be handed over to learned Advocate General for its compliance in letter and spirit. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)