Short note on para legal

1. Role of Para Legal in law firms/ offices

In recent years, the profession of a paralegal has seen an explosive growth. According to reports, the
paralegal profession will see a greater increase in the future. This profession is known to be
challenging yet rewarding. It demands strong professional skills, a firm ethical foundation and higher
levels of knowledge. If you are looking for something unique and if law interests you, paralegal
studies is a great option.

The paralegal is defined as a person who is qualified through education, training or work experience
to perform substantive legal work. This requires knowledge of legal concepts and are not exclusively
performed by a lawyer. Paralegals are hired or employed by a lawyer, law office, governmental
agency or other entity that is authorized by administrative, statutory or court authority. For the ones
outdoor the felony world it can be quite perplexing to apprehend the special terminologies used at
the same time as describing a felony professional. as an example, numerous humans end up
substituting a legal professional for a paralegal. They assume that the task of a legal professional and
a paralegal are equal. but in fact, that is not the case.

Paralegals play an important role in the law tactics and they're called the fourth arm of the legal
profession. but, paralegals have the necessary qualification and perform substantial felony that calls
for the know-how of legal methods. however, paralegals are not certified solicitor, barrister. A
paralegal basically works in a legal environment however they do not provide law-related services to
people.

Duties of a Paralegal

The duties that a paralegal has to perform are extensively numerous. however, the principal
responsibility of a paralegal is to aid legal professionals in their work. a number of the duties that a
paralegal might perform on behalf of a lawyer are the subsequent:To assist the attorneys at some
stage in the rigors with essential files,To behavior studies on articles, laws, and rules,To assist the
lawyer prepare the several pieces of records that he receives, to put in writing reports for lawyers
that are probably of assist all through the trial of the case, to investigate information of the case, To
draft correspondence and files, To assist legal professionals to prepare company conferences,
hearings, and trials.however, as the career turns into an increasing number of traumatic paralegals
can take in more duties as they concentrate on positive regions.

comparing lawyers and Paralegals

initially, in contrast to attorneys and paralegals, do now not require attending a formal college of
regulation and also it is also not mandatory for them to have a license. An attorney can represent
customers in court cases, supply legal advice and exercise law. however, technically a paralegal
wishes to underneath a legal professional.

2. Role of ParaLegal in Administration of Justice

The Legal profession plays important role in the administration of justice. The lawyer assists the
Court in arriving at a correct judgment. The lawyer collects legal materials relating to the case and
thereby helps the Court or Judge to arrive at a correct judgment. Without the assistance of the
lawyer it would be a superhuman task for the Judge to arrive at a satisfactory judgment.91 In the
same think there is need of Para legal Services to aware the weaker section and poor people about
his rights. We must know that the law is very complicated and language of Acts and Regulation is not
simple rather very complicated and confusing to be understood. The Poor and weaker section and
even the citizens of the country require the advice of the advocate to understand the exact meaning
of the provisions of the Act and regulation. Paralegals are thus legal assistant who spend most of
their time helping to manage the massive paperwork generated by legal proceedings. Paralegals file,
sort index, photocopy, and draft legal documents. They may also hold hearings and interview
witnesses. The duties of a Para-Legal, depend on the firm for which the Para-Legal works and the
educational training and experience of the ParaLegal. Many of the Paralegal‟s services are
performed directly for the benefit of a lawyer, business person, or Government employees.92 In
India today, Legal-Aid has constitutional status, popular inspiration and socio-legal individuality. The
fundamental entitlement, set out in Article 14 of the Constitution, of every person to equality before
the law and equal protection of the laws and, in Article 22, of every person arrested “to consult and
to be defended by a legal practitioner of his choice” argues a case for free legal aid. Article 41 also
obligates the State shall “promote with special care the …. Economic interests of the weaker section
of the community and in particular the SCs and STs and shall protect them from social injustice and
all forms of discrimination/exploitation.” Democratic decentralization down to the village level is
implied in Article 40 and the institution of Nyaya Panchayats, which are of respectable antiquity; aim
at justice at the grassroots level, free, by the people and for the people. I have seen that Legal-Aid is
provided by many authorities at National level, State level, District and Taluk and various legal
services committees, namely, The Supreme Court, High Court, District Court and Taluk Legal Services
Committees as provided under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. And still we are unable to
get the aim to provide free Legal-Aid Services to the poor and needy people who cannot afford the
services of a lawyer.

Now the question arises that who can participate in the Legal-Aid programs. The Hon‟le court in the
Case Centre for Legal Research v. State of Kerala93 raised the question as to whether voluntary
organizations or social action groups engaged in the Legal-Aid programme should be supported by
the State Government and if so, to what extent and under what conditions. The Supreme Court in
this case held that there can be no doubt that if the Legal-Aid programme is to succeed, it must
involve public participation. The State Government undoubtedly has an obligation under Article 39-A
of the Constitution which embodies a Directive Principle of the State Policy to set up a
comprehensive and effective Legal-Aid programme in order to ensure that the operation of the legal
system promotes justice on the basis of equality. But it was accepted that no Legal-Aid programme
can succeed if its operation remained confined in the hands of administration. Thus it was essential
that people should be regarded as participants in the programme of legal aid. In present scenario,
the role of Para-Legal Services in administration of justice is a backbone for weaker section of people
not only in Gwalior and Chambal Division but also in whole India. In this regard, it has been found
that 74.26% Indian population is residing in villages and rural areas according to Ministry of Statistics
and Program Implementation of India but our total literacy is 73%.94 The accessibility of the relevant
or required laws is not having to people of India as per the present requirements so people often
have not required awareness or information or literacy and education of the same.

Due to aforesaid reasons the persons are failed to get justice in spite of the existence of the legal
system. India is a democratic country with the existence of rule of law & the welfare state. It is
relevant to mention here that rights to be presumed innocent, until improved equality according to
law is public trail95 and right to equality to a fair and public hearing by independent and impartial
tribunals96. Every person has right to defend and right to consult from a legal practitioner of his
choice. But many people of India are suffering from poverty, therefore they cannot defend and
consult from the legal practitioner due to economic or other disabilities. But in the light of the
principle of Natural Justice, such persons cannot be denied from the justice on the basis of above
said principle so Article-39A Equal Justice and free Legal-Aid 97 has been incorporated as a duty of
the State; But the same is not enforceable by the Court on its own though the Hon‟ble Supreme
Court of India has held it as a Fundamental Right under Article-21 of Constitution of India in the case
of M.M. Haskot v. State of Maharastra98.

CASE COMMENT- MANEKA GANDHI V UNION OF INDIA (1978)

Author: Tamanna Gupta, RGNUL

Court- Supreme Court of India

Bench- 7 Judge Bench

M.Hameedullah , Y.V.Chandrachud, P.N. Bhagwati, V.R. Krishna Iyer & N.L. Untwalia, S.M. Fazalal, &
P.S. Kailasam.

Decided on- 25th January 1978

Citation- 1978 AIR 597, 1978 SCR (2) 621

Facts- Maneka Gandhi was issued a passport on the 1st of July 1976 under the erstwhile Passport
Act 1967. After three days of this issue, she received a letter dated 2nd of July, 1977, from the
Passport Officer regionally in charge in Delhi communicating to her that it was decided by the Union
government to impound her passport under Section 10(3) of the Passport Act 1967 “in public
interest”. The minister was told to surrender her passport within one week from the receipt of that
letter.

A letter was addressed to the Regional Passport Officer by Maneka Gandhi with a request to furnish
a copy of the reasons for sending the order under the act. The reply was sent by the Union
Government, by the Ministry of Affairs on the 6th of July 1977 stating the reason for impounding
the passport is “in the interest of the general public” and not to provide a copy of the list of reasons
for the making of the order. Maneka Gandhi, therefore, filed the current Writ Petition challenging
the action of the Government of India in impounding the said passport and refusing to state reasons
for doing the same.

Issues Raised-

Is the right to travel abroad is a part of a persons’ liberty?

What are the reasons for denying to grant a passport and whether these reasons for impounding a
passport are arbitrary?

Whether the principles of natural justice apply only with regards to Quasi-judicial orders or do they
also apply to administrative orders affecting the rights of the general citizenry?

Subject- Constitutional Law

Laws Applied- Passports Act 1967

Cases Referred to-State of Orissa v Dr. (Miss) Binapani Dei, A.K. Gopalan v State of Madras, ADM
Jabalpur v S.S. Shukla, Haradhan Saha v State of West Bengal, R.C. Cooper v Union of India, Shambu
Nath Sarkar v State of West Bengal
Arguments advanced by petitioner-

1. The right to travel abroad is a part of “personal liberty” falling under the meaning of “expression”
as used in Article 21 and nobody can be deprived of this right except under the procedure prescribed
under law.

2. Section 10(3)(c) of the Passports Act 1967 violates fundamental rights guaranteed to persons
under Articles 14,19 and 21 of the Indian Constitution.

3. The order regarding impounding the passport is made in contravention of rules and principles of
natural justice and is, therefore, null and void under the law. The abovementioned impugned order
has the effect of imposing an unreasonable restriction on the right of free speech and expression
guaranteed Article 19 (1)(a).

4. The abovementioned impugned order could not be regarded as consistent or in consonance with
Article 19 of the Indian Constitution.

5. To impound a passport under S 10(3)(c) of the Passports Act 1967, “public interest” must exist in
the present context and the mere likelihood of public interest which might arise in the future would
not be a valid ground for impounding the passport.

Arguments advanced by the respondent-

The Government is agreeable to taking into consideration any representation that may be made by
the petitioner in respect of the impounding of her passport and allowing her to be heard in the
matter. The opportunity shall be given within two weeks of the receipt of the representation.

It was clarified that in the abovementioned case the grounds for impounding the passport are
reasons mentioned in the affidavit dated 18th of August 1977.

2. The representations made by the petitioner will be dealt with in a fast track manner following the
law.

Judgment-

The landmark judgment was delivered on the 25th of January 1978 and it altered the face of the
Indian Constitution. The ratio of the judgment materially expanded the scope of Article 21 of the
Indian Constitution substantially and this judgment wholly ensured transparency in certain matters
stipulated in the Indian Constitution. The decision was unanimous with some dissent on several
points, however, no major conflict of opinion ensued.

The major findings of the court were as follows-

While delivering the landmark judgment the court altered the face of the Constitution by stating that
though the maxim used in Article 21 is “procedure established by law” rather than “due process of
law” nevertheless, the procedure mentioned therein must necessarily be free from the vices of
irrationality and arbitrariness.

With all due respect to the Constitution makers, it was stated that they never intended to harbor
such a self – destructive idea in the realm of the Constitution. It was never the intent of the makers
that the process must be completely reasonable, just or fair. The constitution was drafted for the
protection of the “people of India” and a wrongful interpretation of Article 21 can be
counterproductive.

The court overruled the decision stated in A.K.Gopalan’s case by declaring that there is a peculiar
relationship between the provisions of the “Golden Triangle” of the Indian Constitution and every
law must pass the tests laid down in such provisions.

The court declared that the scope of the concept of “personal liberty” is not be construed in a
narrower or stricter sense. The court stated that the concept has to be understood broadly and
liberally. Therefore, Article 21 was primarily given an expansive interpretation. The court directed
the future courts to expand upon the dimensions of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution to cover all
the Fundamental Rights and avoid a narrower and strict construction.

The right to go abroad as held in the case of Satwant Singh is within the scope of Article 21 of the
Indian Constitution.

Section 10(3)(c) of the Passport Act 1967 is not in violation of either Article 21 or Article 19(1)(a) or
19 (1)(g). The court further held that the said 1967 provision does not contradict Article 14 of the
Indian constitution either. The court rejected the contention of the petitioner that the phrase “in the
interests of the general public” is not vague.

The court held that Section 10(3)(c) & 10(5) of the Passports Act 1967 is relating to administrative
orders and are therefore open to challenge on the various grounds such as mala fide,
unreasonableness, denial of principles of natural justice and ultra vires of the Indian Constitution.

The court also suggested the union government to ordinarily provide reasons in every case and
should government must rarely use the prerogative of Section 10(5) of the Passports Act 1967.

The rights discussed under 19(1)(a) & 19(1)(g) of the Indian Constitution are not limited or restricted
to the territorial limits of India.

Comments and Conclusion-

The case has been a landmark judgment concerning several aspects. It helped broaden the horizons
of the Golden Triangle of the Indian Constitution- Article 14,19, and 21. It laid down the basis for a
claim of several rights relating to “personal liberty” as under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.

It made a distinction between cases where a person can be denied his or her rights under Article 21
concerning the Passports Act 1967 and cases where a person cannot be denied the abovementioned
rights.

The case went on to be challenged several times and has also been cited in various other important
precedents. The case continues to have a powerful impact on the face of the Indian Constitution.

C. B. Muthamma v. Union of India and others (AIR 1868)

1) Reference Details
Jurisdiction: Supreme Court of India Date of Decision: 17 September 1979

2) Facts

The petitioner was a senior member of the Indian Foreign Service. She brought this petition against
the Government on the grounds that she has been overlooked for promotion because she was a
woman and because some rules governing the employment of women in the Service are
discriminatory in nature and therefore contrary to Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

3) Law

Constitution of India

• Article 14 (equality before the law) • Article 16 (equality of opportunity in matters of public
employment)

4) Legal Arguments

The Petitioner

The petitioner argued that she had been denied promotion to Grade I of the Indian Foreign Service
on the grounds that:

1. there was a long standing practice of hostile discrimination against women 2. she had to
undertake on joining the foreign service that if she got married she would resign from her post 3.
she had to face the consequences of being a woman and thus suffered discrimination 4. the
members of the appointment committee were basically prejudiced as a group

She also submitted that the rules that no married woman has the automatic right to be appointed to
the Service and that a woman employee must get written permission to marry and may be forced to
resign if the Government decides that her marital commitments will hamper her work were
unconstitutional. Furthermore she set out that during the period between her first and second
evaluations, some officers junior to her had been promoted over her, adversely affecting her career.

5) Decision
The three appeal judges presented unanimous findings. JK Iyer Krishna delivered the

decision, first commenting that:

“… sex prejudice against the Indian womanhood pervades the service rules even a third of a century
after Freedom. There is some basis for the charge of bias in the rules and this makes the ominous
indifference of the executive to bring about the banishment of discrimination in the heritage of
service rules. If high officials lose hopes of equal justice under the rules, the legal lot of the little
Indian, already priced out of the expensive judicial market, is best left to guess.”

The Court then analysed the individual rules, finding that:

“If a woman member shall obtain the permission of Government before the marriage, the same risk
is run by Government if a male member contracts a marriage. If the family and domestic
commitments of a woman member of the service is likely to come in the way of efficient discharge
of duties, a similar situation may well arise in the case of a male member … If a married man has a
right, a married woman, other things being equal, stands on no worse footing. Freedom is indivisible,
so is justice.”

The Court found that, since of the rules in question had been or where in the process of deletion,
there was no need to address or attack them. In addition, the petitioner had been promoted
subsequent to her complaint, so further examination of it was pointless.

The Court also noted that:

“The Central Government states that although the petitioner was not found meritorious enough for
promotion some months ago, she has been found to be good now, has been upgraded and
appointed as Ambassador of India to The Hague, for what that is worth.”

The Court dismissed the petition but directed the Government to review the petitioner's case in light
of the only remaining element of her complaint – that relating to the promotion of people junior to
her. The Court emphasised the need to overhaul all service rules to remove discrimination.