Allahabad High Court junks plea which alleged judges use court staff as domestic servants

The Allahabad High Court on Tuesday dismissed a petition alleging that class IV employees working in the district courts of Uttar Pradesh were being forced to work as domestic servants at the residences of judicial officers [Anjuman Himayat Chaprasian Sangh UP vs State of UP]..Justice Alok Mathur said the petition moved by Anjuman Himayat Chaprasian Sangh UP was not maintainable. “A perusal of the bye laws clearly indicates that the object of the association includes taking action for getting better service conditions etc. but clearly did not provide to take recourse of legal proceedings on behalf of its members and in absence of such authorization the present writ petition is not maintainable under the bye-laws,” the Court stated. .The Court also observed that the petitioner had failed to answer a pointed query as to why the judicial officers cannot be assisted by the staff at their residences when writing of judgments and examination of files takes place there.It further took note of the submission made by the counsel representing the High Court that taking files from courts to the residences of judges cannot be called forced labour.“Sri Gaurav Mehrotra has further submitted that facilities are provided to the judicial officers and it is class IV employees who carry file and other material from the courts to the residences and vice versa and, in fact, they assist the judicial officers in dispensation of justice and this cannot be said to be a forced labour or taking any work beyond the prescribed duties.”.Anjuman Himayat Chaprasian Sangh UP (Nyay Bhibhag), representing the class IV employees, had prayed for a direction to the judicial officers of civil courts to not employ them as domestic servants for personal work except during official time. However, the counsel representing the High Court objected to the maintainability of the writ petition. It was submitted that in case there are any allegations of being forced to work at the residence, it can be raised individually by such persons.“A perusal of the bye laws which has been annexed by the petitioner, would indicate that the associations is not authorized to take recourse to legal proceedings to redress the grievance of its members and and even if any resolution is passed authorizing certain persons to file a writ petition the same would be unauthorized act as per the bye laws of the petitioner association,” advocate Gaurav Mehrotra added..The Court noted that counsel representing the petitioner could not dispute the fact that aggrieved court staff can themselves approach the Court for redressal of their grievances. Advocate Anil Kumar Pandey represented the petitioner..[Read Judgment]