Telangana High Court Issues Notice On Advocate’s Plea Challenging Mandatory ₹ 100 Welfare Stamp On Vakalatnamas
The Telangana High Court has issued notice in a writ petition filed by Advocate Vijay Gopal, appearing in person, challenging the mandatory requirement under Sections 12 and 12A of the Telangana Advocates Welfare Fund Act, 1987, which compels advocates to affix a Rs. 100 welfare fund stamp on every Vakalatnama filed before any court or tribunal in the State.
The petition states that unless a Rs. 100/- welfare fund stamp is affixed to every Vakalatnama, his filing is rejected by the High Court’s Registry, and contends that this compulsion to pay Rs. 100/- in every case amounts to an unconstitutional restriction on his right to practice.
A Division Bench of the Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Renuka Yara issued notice, granted time to the Respondents to file their replies. The Court has asked the Registrar General of the High Court and the State to file their response.
The petition has been filed by Advocate Vijay Gopal in person.
The petition states that such imposition violates Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution and falls beyond the legislative competence of the State of Telangana under Article 246 read with Entry 78, List I of the Seventh Schedule. “Despite paying the required Court fee, I am being forced to pay to ‘Advocate Welfare Fund’ of Rs. 100, against my will and NOT numbering the petition I am attempting to file, and this is illegal, unethical and also violation of my Fundamental Rights,” the petition reads.
The petition states that the impugned provisions amount to forced donation to a private association under the guise of legislation and offend the doctrine of colourable legislation. It states, “Donation can never be imposed on people, but only left to the choice of the people.” It is further submitted that the Parliament under the Advocates Act, 1961 and the Advocates Welfare Fund Act, 2001, does not impose any such condition for practicing law, and that “Even the Parliament of India did not make a provision of restricting the Vakalat of any Advocate if the ‘welfare fund stamp’ is not affixed, in their own 2001 Act, then how can the Respondent State make a provision of such nature.”
The petition states that laws relating to practice before the High Court are within the exclusive domain of Parliament, and the said State legislation therefore exceeds its constitutional bounds. It is submitted, “The said provision i.e. Section 12 of the ‘Telangana State Advocate Welfare Fund Act 1987’ is unconstitutional and outside the legislative competence of the respondent state and deserves to be struck down, for venturing into legislative domain not in the jurisdiction of the provincial State and violating ‘item 78, List 1 of the Seventh Schedule r/w Article 246’, as making laws to practice before the High Court is exclusive domain of the Parliament of India.”
The petition also refers to the collection of Rs. 100 as resembling an illegal tax, asserting, “Collecting or mandating ‘Advocate welfare fund’ payment of Rs. 100 by advocates, as though it is a ‘TAX’ is violation of basic principles of charity, as it is to be done by a voluntary act of any person and not by force.”
The Petitioner has prayed that the High Court strike down both Sections 12 and 12A of the Telangana State Advocates Welfare Fund Act, 1987. The prayer reads, “To declare Section 12 of ‘Telangana State Advocates Welfare Fund Act, 1987’ i.e. (Mandatory affixing of Rs. 100 welfare fund stamp on Vakalat) by name ‘Nyayavadula mariyu vari Gumasthala Samkshema Nidhi’, thereby not allowing Advocates to practice law without Rs. 100 payment to Telangana Advocates Welfare Fund and declare Section 12A (distributing collected Rs. 100 as Rs. 86 to Telangana Advocates Welfare Fund and Rs. 14 to Telangana Advocates’ Clerks’ Welfare Fund) as arbitrary, illegal, ultra vires Section 30 (Right to practice) of Advocates Act, 1961 and ultra vires Article 14, 19(1)(c), 19(1)(g), 31C, 246(1), and 254(1) of the Constitution of India and strike down both Section 12 and 12A.”
The petition also prays for a consequential declaration that any Charity or Welfare scheme of any kind cannot be forced or imposed on any citizen or Advocate, and that any donation or welfare contribution cannot be mandatory on any citizen under any pretext of association or welfare.
As an interim relief, the Petitioner seeks that the Rs. 100 stamps already affixed, or required to be affixed in the future, are to be treated as subject to the outcome of the writ and refunded to him should the impugned law be struck down.
Cause Title: Vijay Gopal v. State of Telangana & Ors. (Writ Petition No.13352 of 2025)
