Can Bar Association Claim Exemption From Electricity Charges? Supreme Court To Consider MP HC Bar Association's Plea

Remarking, “We may have sympathy for the bar, but we need to see a larger picture”, a Vacation Bench of Justices Manoj Misra and SVN Bhatti tagged the petition with a matter where a similar issue is pending and will be taken up in August.

The Bench observed that even the Parliament, Supreme Court and the High Court have to pay for electricity charges. So far as electricity is concerned there is no provision of the same being free unless the government takes up the policy decision., it added.

Echoing this sentiment, Justice Bhatti asked why should the cost of consumption of electricity by the bar members must be distributed to all the consumers. Thus, he posed “why should the person who does not have anything to do with the Court pay the cost? The consumption by the (legal) fraternity is to be borne by the citizenry?”

It may also be noted that the petition had also sought a direction to the effect that the State of Madhya Pradesh and the Department of Law (also a party to the petition) should make payment of the electricity bills of the Bar Associations to the electricity companies.

At the outset, the counsel for the petitioner apprised that earlier the Division Bench of the High Court had taken a view that electricity charges should not be leviable on the bar association. This was because the Bar plays an essential role in the administration of justice.

At this juncture, Justice Misra shared his experience of Allahabad High Court where the bar association is allotted the premises by the High Court. However, the court still charges the latter for the electricity charges.

“As a licensee whatever electricity you consume, either there must be some arrangement between you and the High Court or there must be a separate metre installed at the instance of the bar.,” Court said. 

Counsel responded that there is a separate metre. He added that the bar associations have spaces that are accessed by both lawyers and litigants. On this ground the exemption for the supply of electricity is being sought.

However, the Court did not find any force in the said submission and categorically said “There is no question of exemption. Even the Parliament, Supreme Court, High Court have to pay for electricity charges. Either it falls on the establishment or it falls on the licensee. Now, if there is an arrangement by the High Court qua the licensee that you will pay the electricity dues, where is the question of High Court bearing the burden. So far is electricity is concerned there is no provision that it would be free.”

After being queried about the demand, the Counsel said that the same is around 94 Lakhs. He added that there are around 70-80 chambers and 700-800 tables for lawyers.

During the hearing, Justice Bhatti also explained to the counsel that “Because of the regulatory commissions, what would happen is that your consumption of electricity has costs, and the same has to be adjusted....the what they will do is that consumption costs will be distributed to the general category.”

He also shared his experience of Kerela High Court where the bar association has separate meter and accordingly, they pay charges every month.

Notwithstanding, the Court after remarking “We may have sympathy for the bar, but we need to see a larger picture” issued notice.

Details Of The Impugned Order

Before the High Court, the Bar Associations had submitted that they are providing several facilities like conference room, library, canteen etc., therefore, the State Government is under obligation to make the said payment. It also argued that the companies cannot make any recovery of electricity bills and that the disconnection of the electricity connection was illegal and arbitrary.

On the other hand, electricity companies had submitted that there was nothing like free electricity and that there was high infrastructural cost starting from production to supply.

The High Court, after referring to the relevant provisions of the Electricity Act, observed that there cannot be any free electricity as far as the distribution company is concerned.

“Thus, it is evident that any public announcement by the then Chief Minister in Wakeel Panchayat will, at best, be an executive instruction which has no statutory force and cannot override statutory provisions contained in Electricity Act, 2003.,” the Court added.

It also marked that mere mutual understanding to provide certain facilities will not become a right in the hands of the members of the association to claim them as freebies. It went on to state that lawyers are expected to rise above sectorial interest and contribute in all modes of national development.

“They are the torch bearers and conscious keepers of the people in the democracy in a welfare State and when their role is examined starting from the freedom movement till date, their contribution to the development is immense especially in the form of social service given by them to do pro bono cases or to assist the legal aid in the country. Thus, when examined from this perspective, it is evident that they would not like to be part of such scheme which causes overall dent to the national/state interest.,” the Court added.

Against this backdrop, the Court concluded that once petitioners had taken an electricity connection and had entered into a contractual relationship, then it cannot bypass its contractual liability and shift the same on the State Government.

Case Details: M.P. HIGH COURT BAR ASSOCIATION v. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ORS_ SLP(C) No. 13331/2024

Click Here To Read/Download Order