District Required To Pay Panel Advocates For All Matters They Received Notice For And Appeared In: Allahabad High Court

In a recent case, the Allahabad High Court directed the District of Jaunpur to pay an ex-panel advocate the outstanding fees they owed him. A division bench comprising Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Justice Vipin Chandra Dixit held that the district was required to compensate the advocate for all the cases where he received notices and appeared before the Court.

By letter dated 16.05.2013, the petitioner was engaged as a panel advocate for Gaon Sabhas in the Varanasi Division of the state of Uttar Pradesh. The said division includes the districts of Varanasi, Ghazipur, Jaunpur and Chandauli. Upon removal from the panel on 27.12.2019, the petitioner raised his professional bills for the cases in which he represented the Gaon Sabhas.

The districts of Varanasi, Ghazipur and Chandauli cleared their dues and assured that any pending amounts would also be given to the petitioner. However, despite repeated request, the District of Jaunpur refused to pay him. Aggrieved, the petitioner approached the High Court requesting that the authorities be directed to clear the outstanding dues of the petitioner.

The Court passed an order in the petitioner's favour, however, the same was not complied with. In response, the petitioner filed a Contempt Application, subsequent to which, the respondent rejected the claim of the petitioner. It was stated that the bills placed before them were not directly related to matters of the Gaon Sabha.

Petitioner filed another writ petition, whereby the Court directed that the petitioner be allowed to make a representation before the respondent for his grievances. However, the respondent dismissed the fresh representation submitted by him. Thus, the present Writ Petition.

Petitioner submitted that no allegations had been made against him for non-appearance or improper practice and that his claim was being rejected on the sole contention that Gaon Sabha was not directly related to the cases in question. It was argued that the petitioner had been appointed to represent the Gaon Sabhas and that he appeared in all the cases in which the District of Jaunpur was impleaded in. Thus, he contended that he should be compensated for his services.

Per contra, counsel for the respondent submitted that the matters related to fair price shop, Lohia Awas, Prime Minister Awas, proceedings against Pradhan, family register, Aangabadi stipend and ration card, were not related to the Gaon Sabha. It was contended that the Gaon Sabha was merely a performa party and thus the petitioner would not be entitled to any payment for those cases.

High Court Verdict

The Court examined the appointment letter of the petitioner and held that he had been appointed and authorised to appear in all cases in which the Gaon Sabha had been impleaded as a party. It was held that there was no stipulation that stated that the petitioner was not required to appear in cases related to the fair price shop, Lohia Awas, Prime Minister Awas, etc.

The Court held that since notices were served to the petitioner in all these cases, and that he appeared before the Court as well, he was entitled to receive his professional fees.

“Since the petitioner was authorized to receive notices in all the matters where the Gaon Sabha was a party and he appeared before the Court and assisted the Court, the petitioner is entitled for professional fees. The action of respondent no. 2 in denying the professional fees to the petitioner is arbitrary and malafide,” held the Court.

The Court directed the respondents to re-consider the claim of the petitioner and pay him the outstanding fees.

Accordingly, the writ petition was allowed.

Case Title: Manoj Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. and Anr. [WRIT - C No. - 28196 of 2023]

Click Here To Read/Download Order