Bombay HC rejects PIL seeking inclusion of services by lawyers under 'Essential Services'

CASE BACKGROUND 

• A criminal writ petition under the title of Imran Mohd. Salar Shaikh Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors was filed in the Bombay High Court under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution r/w Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code on 10 July
• The petition which was filed by an advocate who sought a declaration of the services rendered by the lawyers to be covered under ‘essential services’ to exempt the lawyers from the restrictions that have been imposed on traffic movement in the lockdown
• Advocate Kareem Pathan appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that he was appearing before Metropolitan Magistrate at Esplanade Court in a bail application on 29 June and was stopped by the police on the Western Express Highway and was challaned for an amount of Rs. 500

ORDER OF THE COURT

• The court through its division bench of Justice SS Shinde and Justice Madhav Jamdar held that “it is within the exclusive domain of the State Legislature to legislate as to whose services to be included into the essential services, keeping in view the paramount interest of the community.”
• The court interpreted through Sections 2 (a) and 3 of the Maharashtra Essential Services Maintenance Act, 2017 to determine the aims and objectives.
• The court further held that no directions can be issued to the State Legislature under the relief claimed to bring legal service providers under the essential services
• The court also rejected the prayer seeking revocation of challan against the petitioner noting that the petitioner has an alternative efficacious remedy for claiming the relief.

DO YOU THINK THE LEGAL SERVICE PROVIDERS SHOULD BE ENUMERATED UNDER THE SCOPE OF ESSENTIAL SERVICES?

DROP YOUR VIEWS IN THE COMMENTS