Download Alternate Dispute System and more Lecture notes Law in PDF only on Docsity!
Notes on Alternate Dispute Resolution - Paper II
LL.B II (Sem. IV)
Module 01 ADR Mechanism ,concept and History. The Parliament enacted the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996 with a view to making arbitration less technical and more useful and effective, which not only removes many serious defects of the earlier arbitration law, but also incorporates modern concepts of arbitration. What it now needs is inculcation of the culture of arbitration within the bar, the bench and the arbitral community. INTRODUCTION “I realized that the true fiction of a lawyer was to unite parties… A large part of my time during the 20 years of my practice as a lawyer was occupied in bringing out private compromise of hundreds of cases. I lost nothing thereby- not even money, certainly not my soul.”
- Mahatma Gandhi ADR is not immune from criticism. Some have seen in it a waste of time; others recognize the risk that it be only initiated to check what is the minimum offer that the other party would accept.[ 3] he delay in disposal of cases in Law Courts, for whatever reason it may be, has really defeated the purpose for which the people approach the Courts for their redressal. In many parts of India, rapid development has meant increased caseloads for already overburdened courts, further leading to notoriously slow adjudication. As a result, alternative dispute resolution mechanisms have become more crucial for businesses operating in India as well as those doing businesses with Indian firms.[ 1] So Alternate Dispute Resolution (herein after as ADR) is necessary as a substitute to existing methods of dispute resolution such as litigation, conflict, violence and physical fights or rough handling of situations. It is a movement with a drive from evolving positive approach and attitude towards resolving a dispute. In the subsequent parts of the paper we will discuss the evolution of ADR and its present scenario in the Indian context.
HISTORY
In India, the law and practice of private and transactional commercial disputes without court intervention can be dated back to ancient times. Arbitration or mediation as an alternative to dispute resolution by municipal courts has been prevalent in India from Vedic times. The earliest known treatise is the Bhradarnayaka Upanishad, in which various types of arbitral bodies viz (i) the Puga (ii) the Sreni (iii) the Kula are referred to. These arbitral bodies, known as Panchayats, dealt with variety of disputes, such as disputes of contractual, matrimonial and even of a criminal nature.[ 4] The disputants would ordinarily accept the decision of the panchayat and hence a settlement arrived consequent to conciliation by the panchayat would be as binding as the decision that was on clear legal obligations. The Muslim rule in India saw the incorporation of the principles of Muslim law in the Indian culture. Those laws were systematically compiled in the form of a commentary and came to be known as Hedaya. During Muslim rule, all Muslims in India were governed by Islamic laws- the Shari’ah as contained in the Hedaya. The Hedaya contains provisions for arbitration as well. The Arabic word for arbitration is Tahkeem, while the word for an arbitrator is Hakam. An arbitrator was required to posses the qualities essential for a Kazee–an official Judge presiding over a court of law, whose decision was binding on the parties subject to legality and validity of the award. The court has the jurisdiction to enforce such awards given under Shari’ah though it is not entitled to review the merits of the dispute or the reasoning of the arbitrator. ADR picked up pace in the country, with the coming of the East India Company. The British government gave legislative form to the law of arbitration by promulgating regulations in the three presidency towns: Calcutta, Bombay and Madras. Bengal Resolution Act, 1772 and Bengal Regulation Act, 1781 provided parties to submit the dispute to the arbitrator, appointed after mutual agreement and whose verdict shall be binding on both the parties.[ 6] These remained in force till the Civil Procedure Code 1859, and were extended in 1862 to the Presidency towns. LEGISLATIONS for ADR IN INDIA Code of Civil Procedure The Code of Civil Procedure, 1859 in its sections 312 to 325 dealt with arbitration in suits while sections 326 and 327 provided for arbitration without court intervention. The Code of Civil Procedure (Act 5 of 1908) repealed the Act of 1882. The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has laid down that cases must be encouraged to go in for ADR under section 89(1).[ 7] Under the First Schedule, Order XXXII A, Rule 3 a duty is cast upon the courts that it shall make an endeavor to assist the parties in the first instance, in arriving at a settlement in respect of the
the 1940 Act. In 1978, the UNCITRAL Secretariat, the Asian African Legal Consultative Committee (AALCC), the International Council for Commercial Arbitration (ICCA) and the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) met for a consultative meeting, where the participants were of the unanimous view that it would be in the interest of International Commercial Arbitration if UNCITRAL would initiate steps leading to the establishment of uniform standards of arbitral procedure. The preparation of a Model Law on arbitration was considered the most appropriate way to achieve the desired uniformity. The full text of this Model Law was adopted on 21st June 1985 by UNCITRAL. This is a remarkable legacy given by the United Nations to International Commercial Arbitration, which has influenced Indian Law. In India, the Model Law has been adopted almost in its entirety in the 1996 Act. This Act repealed all the three previous statutes. Its primary purpose was to encourage arbitration as a cost- effective and quick mechanism for the settlement of commercial disputes. It covers both domestic arbitration and international commercial arbitration. It marked an epoch in the struggle to find an alternative to the traditional adversarial system of litigation in India. The changes brought about by the 1996 Act were so drastic that the entire case law built up over the previous fifty- six years on arbitration was rendered superfluous. Unfortunately, there was no widespread debate and understanding of the changes before such an important legislative change was enacted. The Government of India enacted the 1996 Act by an ordinance, and then extended its life by another ordinance, before Parliament eventually passed it without reference to Parliamentary Committee. Arbitration, as practiced in India, instead of shortening the lifespan of the dispute resolution, became one more “inning” in the game. Not only that, the arbitrator and the parties’ lawyers treated arbitration as “extra time” or overtime work to be done after attending to court matters. The result was that the normal session of an arbitration hearing was always for a short duration. Absence of a full- fledged Arbitration Bar effectively prevented arbitrations being heard continuously on day- to- day basis over the normal working hours, viz. 4 - 5 hours every day. This resulted in elongation of the period for disposal. Veerappa Moily also said in the ADR congress held in the year 2010 that the 1996 Act, although modeled along international standards, has so far proved to be insufficient in meeting the needs of the business community, for the speedy and impartial resolution of disputes in India. The Law Commission of India prepared a report on the experience of the 1996 Act and suggested a number of amendments. Based on the recommendations of the Commission, the Government of India introduced the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Bill, 2003, in the Parliament. The standing committee of law ministry felt that provisions of the Bill gave room for excessive intervention by the courts in arbitration proceedings.
ADR IN INDIA
ADR can be broadly classified into two categories: court- annexed options (Mediation, Conciliation) and community based dispute resolution mechanism (Lok- Adalat). The following are the modes of ADR practiced in India: Arbitration Mediation Conciliation Negotiation Lok Adalat
1. Arbitration: The definition of ‘arbitration’ in section 2(1) (a) verbatim reproduces the text of article 2(a) of the Model Law- ‘arbitration means any arbitration whether or not administered by a permanent arbitral institution’.[ 17] It is a procedure in which the dispute is submitted to an arbitral tribunal which makes a decision (an “award”) on the dispute that is binding on the parties. It is a private, generally informal and non- judicial trial procedure for adjudicating disputes. There are four requirements of the concept of arbitration: an arbitration agreement; a dispute; a reference to a third party for its determination; and an award by the third party. The essence lies in the point that it is a forum chosen by the parties with an intention that it must act judicially after taking into account relevant evidence before it and the submission of the parties.Hence it follows that if the forum chosen is not required to act judicially, the process it is not arbitration. Types of arbitration are: Ad Hoc Arbitration An ad hoc arbitration is one which is not administered by an institution and therefore, the parties are required to determine all aspects of the arbitration like the number of arbitrators, manner of their appointment, etc. Provided the parties approach the arbitration in a spirit of cooperation, ad hoc proceedings can be more flexible, cheaper and faster than an administered proceeding. The advantage is that, it is agreed to and arranged by the parties themselves. However, the ground realities show that arbitration in India, particularly ad hoc arbitration, is becoming quite expensive vis- à- vis traditional litigation. Institutional Arbitration An institutional arbitration is one in which a specialized institution with a permanent character intervenes and assumes the functions of aiding and administering the arbitral process, as
the common man’s interest. In India, mediation has not yet been very popular. One of the reasons for this is that mediation is not a formal proceeding and it cannot be enforced by courts of law. There is a lack of initiative on the part of the government or any other institutions to take up the cause of encouraging and spreading awareness to the people at large.
3. Conciliation: Conciliation is “a process in which a neutral person meets with the parties to a dispute which might be resolved; a relatively unstructured method of dispute resolution in which a third party facilitates communication between parties in an attempt to help them settle their differences”. This consists in an attempt by a third party, designated by the litigants, to reconcile them either before they resort to litigation (whether to court or arbitration), or after. The attempt to conciliate is generally based on showing each side the contrary aspects of the dispute, in order to bring each side together and to reach a solution. Section 61 of the 1996 Act provides for conciliation of disputes arising out of legal relationship, whether contractual or not and to all proceedings relating thereto. After its enactment, there can be no objection, for not permitting the parties to enter into a conciliation agreement regarding the settlement of even future disputes. There is a subtle difference between mediation and conciliation. While in meditation, the third party, neutral intermediary, termed as mediator plays more active role by giving independent compromise formulas after hearing both the parties; in conciliation, the third neutral intermediary’s role, is to bring the parties together in a frame of mind to forget their animosities and be prepared for an acceptable compromise on terms midway between the stands taken before the commencement of conciliation proceedings. 4. Negotiation: Negotiation- communication for the purpose of persuasion- is the pre- eminent mode of dispute resolution. Compared to processes using mutual third parties, it has the advantage of allowing the parties themselves to control the process and the solution. Essentials of Negotiation are: It is a communication process; It resolves conflicts; It is a voluntary exercise; It is a non- binding process;
Parties retain control over outcome and procedure; There is a possibility of achieving wide ranging solutions, and of maximizing joint gains. In India, Negotiation doesn’t have any statutory recognition. Negotiation is self counseling between the parties to resolve their dispute. Negotiation is a process that has no fixed rules but follows a predictable pattern.
5. Lok Adalats: Lok Adalat was a historic necessity in a country like India where illiteracy dominated other aspects of governance. It was introduced in 1982 and the first Lok Adalat was initiated in Gujarat. The evolution of this movement was a part of the strategy to relieve heavy burden on courts with pending cases. It was the conglomeration of concepts of social justice, speedy justice, conciliated result and negotiating efforts. They cater the need of weaker sections of society. It is a suitable alternative mechanism to resolve disputes in place of litigation. Lok Adalats have assumed statutory recognition under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. These are being regularly organized primarily by the State Legal Aid and the Advice Boards with the help of District Legal Aid and Advice Committees. Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987: The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 was brought into force on 19 November 1995. The object of the Act was to provide free and competent legal services to the weaker sections of the society to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen. The concept of legal services which includes Lok Adalat is a revolutionary evolution of resolution of disputes. Though settlements were affected by conducting Lok Nyayalayas prior to this Act, the same has not been given any statutory recognition. But under the new Act, a settlement arrived at in the Lok Adalats has been given the force of a decree which can be executed through Court as if it is passed by it. Sections 19, 20, 21 and 22 of the Act deal with Lok Adalat. Section 20 provides for different situations where cases can be referred for consideration of Lok Adalat. Honorable Delhi High court has given a landmark decision highlighting the significance of Lok Adalat movement in the case of Abdul Hasan and National Legal Services Authority v. Delhi Vidyut Board and Others[ 35]. The court passed the order giving directions for setting up of permanent Lok Adalats. The evolution of ADR mechanisms was not of that much success. Thereby, the trend is the imposition of responsibility and duty on Court
CONCLUSION
With the advent of the alternate dispute resolution, there is new avenue for the people to settle their disputes. The settlement of disputes in Lok Adalat quickly has acquired good popularity among the public and this has really given rise to a new force to ADR and this will no doubt reduce the pendency in law Courts. There is an urgent need for justice dispensation through ADR mechanisms. The ADR movement needs to be carried forward with greater speed. This will considerably reduce the load on the courts apart from providing instant justice at the door- step, without substantial cost being involved. If they are successfully given effect then it will really achieve the goal of rendering social justice to the parties to the dispute. FORMS OF ADR. Alternative Dispute Resolution is the use of methods such as mediation and arbitration to resolve a dispute instead of litigation. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is a way to settle disputes without litigation. Using ADR procedures can avoid the acrimony that often accompanies extended trials and allows parties to understand each other’s position and craft their own solutionCommon Forms of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) alternative dispute resolution The most common forms of ADR for civil cases are conciliation, mediation, arbitration, neutral evaluation, settlement conferences and community dispute resolution programs. Facilitation Facilitation is the least formal of the ADR procedures. A neutral third- party works with both sides to reach a resolution of their dispute. Facilitation assumes that the parties want to reach a settlement. The negotiation is done through telephone contacts, written correspondence, or via e- mail. Facilitation is sometimes used by judges at settlement teleconferences exploring alternatives to taking the dispute to trial. Mediation Mediation is more formal but still leaves control of the outcome to the parties. An impartial mediator helps the parties try to reach a mutually acceptable resolution to the dispute. The parties control the substance of the discussions and any agreement reached. A typical session starts with each party telling their story. The mediator listens and helps them identify the issues in the dispute, offering options for resolution and assisting them in crafting a settlement.
Mediation can take many forms, depending on the needs of the parties, such as: Face to face – parties directly communicate during the process, Shuttle – the mediator separates the parties and shuttles between each one with proposals for settlement, Facilitative – the mediator helps the parties directly communicate with each other, or Evaluative – the mediator makes an assessment of the merit of the parties’ claims during separate meetings and may propose terms of settlement. WHEN MEDIATION? Mediation should be considered when the parties have a relationship they want to preserve. So when family members, neighbors or business partners have a dispute, mediation may be the best ADR procedure to use. Mediation is also effective when emotions may get in the way of a solution. A mediator can help the parties communicate in a non- threatening and effective manner. Mediation is available to the parties at any point in the litigation process including through the appeal. Arbitration Arbitration is the most formal of the ADR procedures and takes the decision making away from the parties. The arbitrator hears the arguments and evidence from each side and then decides the outcome of the dispute. Arbitration is less formal than a trial and the rules of evidence are usually relaxed. Each party can present proofs and arguments at the hearing. There isn’t, however, any facilitative discussion between the parties. Unlike other forms of ADR, the award is often supported by a reasoned opinion (though the parties can agree that no opinion will issue). Arbitration can be “binding” or “non- binding.” Binding arbitration means the parties have waived their right to a trial, agree to accept the arbitrator’s decision as final and, usually, there is no right of appeal of the decision. If there is a binding arbitration clause in a contract, the matter must proceed to arbitration and there is no trial. Non- binding arbitration means the parties can request a trial if they don’t accept the arbitrator’s decision. Some courts will impose costs and fines if the court decision is not more favorable than that awarded in arbitration. Non- binding arbitration is increasingly rare.
Low Ratio of Judges to Population Unfilled Vacancies. Long Procedural. Pendency of cases. About 40 years ago, late Mr. M.C. Setalvad, the first Attorney General of India, address the bar Association of India and said: “No doubt, the British system of administration was very good and led to excellent results, but it had its defects which have been accentuated.
. In these days, therefore, what is required is a radical change in the method of administration of justice. We want court to which people can go with ease and with as little cost as possible. It is not merely the quickness of justice but it is the easy approach and quick disposal both of which are needed and that only can be achieved if the system is completely overhauled.” Justice R.C. Lahoti also observed that “Working under considerable handicaps such as inadequate funds, budgetary allocations for law and justice not being part of plan expenditure, lack of resources, shortage of staff and infrastructure, and the Indian judiciary can still claim a better standing with the other wings of governance in performance.” An Analysis of Evaluation of Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanism in Indian Judiciary Justice is the foundation and object of any civilized society. The quest for justice has been an ideal which mankind has been aspiring for generations down the line. Dispute resolution is one of the major function Indian Judiciary and it is important for a stable society. Through the medium of the State, norms and institutions are created to secure social order and to attain the ends of justice or the least to establish dispute resolution processes. Government of India works through different organs and the judiciary is one that which is directly responsible for theadministration of justice. In India judiciary is the tangible delivery point of justice. Resolving disputes is one of the important factor for the peaceful existence of society. Arbitration, the mode of ADR, is recognized by Indian Judiciary as a tool of settlement of dispute. The arbitration was originally governed by the provisions of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940.
The Courts mainly concerned over the supervision of Arbitral Tribunals and they were very keen to see whether the arbitrator has exceeded his jurisdiction while deciding the issue, which has been referred to him for arbitration. It is clear from the study of Preamble to our Constitution also aspiration as “justice- social, economic and political”. Article 39A of the Constitution provides for ensuring equal access to justice. Administration of Justice involves protection of the innocent, punishment of the guilty and the satisfactory resolution of disputes. We all know that our Indian judicial system is very broad, fatigued, boring, unexciting and tiring. Not only is the judicial process extremely expensive for an ordinary person but also takes years and years to deliver justice. In order to overcome the much criticised delay in justice delivery, the adoption of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms like Lok Adalats, arbitration, mediation and conciliation was thought of and subsequently practiced with commendable success. Although the resolution be encouraged, but confined to matters where it is more suitable/ appropriate as compared to the ‟efficient and proper‟ court procedures. It should not merely be regarded as an escape route form the inability of the courts to dispense justice in time. Contribution of Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Administration of Justice In Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. NEPC India Ltd.148, the Supreme Court explicitly made it clear that the 1996 Act is very much different from that of Act, 1940. The provisions made in Act of 1940 lead to some misconstruction and so the Act of 1996 was enacted In order to get help in construing these provisions made in Act of 1996, it is more relevant to refer to the UNCITRAL Model Law besides the Act of 1996 rather than following the provisions of the Act of 1940. In Grid Corp. of Orissa Ltd. v. Indian Charge Chrome Ltd.149, Section- 37(1) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 provides for arbitration by the Commission or its nominee any dispute arising between the licensees or in respect of matters provided under. The Orissa High Court held that Section- 7 of the Arbitration Act, 1996 would apply to the present case in view of the fact that the scope of the Arbitration Act, is very wide and it not only contains arbitration agreement in writing but also other agreements as mentioned in subject.
(7) The administrative expenses of the Central Authority, including the salaries, allowances and pensions payable to the Member- Secretary, officers and other employees of the Central Authority, shall be defrayed out of the Consolidated Fund of India. (8) All orders and decisions of the Central Authority shall be authenticated by the Member Secretary or any other officer of the Central Authority duly authorised by the Executive Chairman of that Authority. (9) No act or proceeding of the Central Authority shall be invalid merely on the ground of the existence of any vacancy in or any defect in the constitution of the Central Authority. Section 3A. Supreme Court Legal Services Committee (1) The Central Authority shall constitute a Committee to be called the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee for the purpose of exercising such powers and performing such functions as may be determined by regulations made by the Central Authority. (2) The Committee shall consist of - (a) A sitting judge of the Supreme Court who shall be the Chairman; and (b) Such number of other members possessing such experience and qualifications as may be prescribed by the Central Government to be nominated by the Chief Justice of India.
- The Chief Justice of India shall appoint a person to be the Secretary to the Committee, possessing such experience and qualifications as may be prescribed by the Central Government. (4) The terms of office and other conditions relating thereto, of the Members and Secretary of the Committee shall be such as may be determined by regulations made by the Central Authority. (5) The Committee may appoint such number of officers and other employees as may be prescribed by the Central Government, in consultation with the Chief Justice of India, for the efficient discharge of its functions. (6) The officers and other employees of the Committee shall be entitled to such salary and allowances and shall be subject to such other conditions of service as may be prescribed by the Central Government in consultation with the Chief Justice of India. Section 4. Functions of the Central Authority The Central Authority shall perform all or any of the following functions, namely:- (a) Lay down policies and principles for making legal services available under the provisions of this Act.
(b) Frame the most effective and economical schemes for the purpose of making legal services available under the provisions of this Act. (c) Utilise the funds at its disposal and make appropriate allocations of funds to the State Authorities and District Authorities. (d) Take necessary steps by way of social justice litigation with regard to consumer protection, environmental protection or any other matter of special concern to the weaker sections of the society and for this purpose, give training to social workers in legal skills. (e) Organise legal aid camps, especially in rural areas, slums or labour colonies with the dual purpose of educating the weaker sections of the society as to their rights as well as encouraging the settlement of disputes through Lok Adalats. (f) Encourage the settlement of disputes by way of negotiations, arbitration and conciliation. (g) Undertake and promote research in the field of legal services with special reference to the need for such services among the poor. (h) To do all things necessary for the purpose of ensuring commitment to the fundamental duties of citizens under Part IVA of the Constitution. (i) Monitor and evaluate implementation of the legal aid programmes at periodic intervals and provide for independent evaluation of programmes and schemes implemented in whole or in part by funds provided under this Act. (j) Provide grants- in- aid for specific schemes to various voluntary social service institutions and the State and District Authorities, from out of the amounts placed at its disposal for the implementation of legal services schemes under the provisions of this Act. (k) Develop, in consultation with the Bar Council of India, programmes for clinical legal education and promote guidance and supervise the establishment and working of legal services clinics in universities, law colleges and other institutions. (l) Take appropriate measures for spreading legal literacy and legal awareness amongst the people and, in particular, to educate weaker sections of the society about the rights, benefits and privileges guaranteed by social welfare legislations and other enactments as well as administrative programmes and measures. (m) Make special efforts to enlist the support of voluntary social welfare institutions working at the grass- root level, particularly among the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes, women and rural and urban labour; and (n) Coordinate and monitor the functioning of State Authorities, District Authorities, Supreme Court Legal Services Committee, High Court Legal Services Committees, Taluk Legal Services Committees and voluntary social service institutions and other legal services organisations
(5) The State Authority may appoint such number of officers and other employees may be prescribed by the State Government, in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court, for the efficient discharge of its functions under this Act. (6) The officers and other employees of the State Authority shall be entitled to such salary and allowances and shall be subject to such other conditions of service as may be prescribed by the State Government in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court. (7) The administrative expenses of the State Authority, including the salaries, allowances and pensions payable to the Member- Secretary, officers and other employees of the State Authority shall be defrayed out of the Consolidated Fund of the State. (8) All orders and decisions of the State Authority shall be authenticated by the Member- Secretary or any other officer of the State Authority duly authorised by the Executive Chairman of the State Authority. (9) No act or proceeding of a State Authority shall be invalid merely on the ground of the existence of any vacancy in, or any defect in the constitution of the State Authority. Section 7. Functions of the State Authority (1) It shall be the duty of the State Authority to give effect to the policy and directions of the Central Authority. (2) Without prejudice to the generality of the functions referred to in sub- section (1), the State Authority shall perform all or any of the following functions, namely:- (a) Give legal service to persons who satisfy the criteria laid down under this Act. (b) Conduct Lok Adalats, including Lok Adalats for High Court cases. (c) Undertake preventive and strategic legal aid programmes; and (d) Perform such other functions as the State Authority may, in consultation with the Central Authority, fix by regulations. Section 8. State Authority to Act in Coordination with Other Agencies, etc., and be Subject to Directions given by Central Authority In the discharge of its functions the State Authority shall appropriately act in co- ordination with other governmental agencies, non- governmental voluntary social service institutions, universities and other bodies engaged in the work of promoting the cause of legal services to the poor and shall also be guided by such directions as the Central Authority may give to it in writing. Section 8A. High Court Legal Services Committee
(1) The State Authority shall constitute a Committee to be called the High Court Legal Services Committee for every High Court, for the purpose of exercising such powers and performing such functions as may be determined by regulations made by the State Authority. (2) The Committee shall consist of :- (a) A sitting Judge of the High Court who shall be the Chairman; and (b) Such number of other Members possessing such experience and qualifications as may be determined by regulations made by the State Authority, to be nominated by the Chief Justice of the High Court. (3) The Chief Justice of the High Court shall appoint a Secretary to the Committee possessing such experience and qualifications as may be prescribed by the State Government. (4) The terms of office and other conditions relating thereto, of the Members and Secretary of the Committee shall be such as may be determined by the regulations, made by the State Authority. (5) The Committee may appoint such number of officers and other employees as may be prescribed by the State Government in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court for the efficient discharge of its functions. (6) The officers and other employees of the Committee shall be entitled to such salary and allowances and shall be subject to such other conditions of service as may be prescribed by the State Government in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court. Section 9. District Legal Services Authorities (1) The State Government shall in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court, constitute a body to be called the District Legal Services Authority for every District in the State to exercise the powers and perform the functions conferred on, or assigned to the District Authority under this Act. (2) A District Authority shall consist of :- (a) The District Judge who shall be its Chairman; and (b) Such number of other Members, possessing such experience and qualifications as may be prescribed by the State Government, to be nominated by that Government in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court. (3) The State Authority shall, in consultation with the Chairman of the District Authority appoint a person belonging to the State Judicial Service not lower in rank than that of a Subordinate Judge or Civil Judge posted at the seat of the District Judiciary as Secretary of the District Authority to exercise such powers and perform such duties under the Chairman of
