Nithyakalyani Narayanan. V
The Allahabad High Court held recently that the legal profession does not constitute a commercial activity and hence it does not attract commercial rates for electricity consumption.
A double-judge bench of Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Justice Anish Kumar Gupta remarked that an advocate, who is appointed as an officer of the court, is not to indulge in business or commercial activities and that the Bar Council of India does not allow one to advertise their services.
The Bench emphasised that the Advocates also have defined duties towards the court, clients, colleagues, and opponents and that these features categorically distinguish the legal profession from trade or business. Hence, it cannot be called a commercial activity. “The advocate’s profession cannot be categorised to be charged under LMV-2 (commercial category), which is applicable to the commercial activities. The lawyer’s activities are not commercial establishment as held by the Supreme Court and by various High Courts … The Lawyers chambers / offices shall be charged only under LMV-1 Domestic category as the lawyers neither do any trade or business nor are involved in any commercial activity.”
The Court was hearing the petition filed by a Tehsil Bar Association in Uttar Pradesh against the applicability of commercial electricity consumption rates to lawyers’ chambers. The applicants argued that the profession of a lawyer was not a commercial activity and that they serve society by playing a role in the administration of justice. They relied on circulars issued by the Uttar Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission (UPERC) in which the judiciary was placed under the LMV-1 category, which is applicable to domestic users of electricity.
The applicants also underlined that the chambers of the Noida District Bar Association were being charged under the LMV-1 category. The Advocates representing the Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation counter-argued that as per the rate schedule for the financial year 2022-23, the activities of lawyers fall under ‘non-domestic purposes‘, which is to be charged for electricity consumption under the LMV-2 category. It was argued that the applicants should approach the UPERC as the UPERC approves the rate schedules.
The Bench observed that activities of advocates did not find a mention under any category in the rate schedule for the financial year 2022-23 and that the LMV-2 category was applicable for non-domestic purposes like all types of shops (including hotels, restaurants, guest house, private transit hospitals, private student hostel, etc).
It was further observed that to bring the lawyers’ offices within the categories of non-domestic purposes, the activity must be established to be of similar nature as illustrated in the rate schedule under category LMV-2.
The Court cited the Supreme Court judgment in M.P. Electricity Board and Ors. v. Shiv Narayan Chopra and remarked that the legal profession is non-commercial in nature and that commercial tariff rates cannot be charged to lawyers for their work.
The petition was allowed and earlier circulars imposing LMV-1 rates were held to be applicable to lawyers’ chambers within the court premises.
Name of the case: Tehsil Bar Association, Sadar Tehsil Parisar, Gandhi Nagar, Ghaziabad vs UPERC
Bench: Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Justice Anish Kumar Gupta
Click here to access the judgment.