IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 22ND JANUARY 2008 / 2ND MAGHA 1929 WA.No. 82 of 2008() ------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.27706/2007 Dated 02/11/2007 .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 1 & 4: --------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI. P.K. BABU RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3: ------------------------- 1. K.C.POULOSE, ADVOCATE, 'NARAYANI NILAYAM', 9/1866, A.M.THOMAS ROAD, KOCHI-16. 2. CORPORATION OF KOCHI, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, ERNAKULAM. 3. INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD., REP. BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, AMBALAMUGHAL, ERNAKULAM.` BY ADV. SRI.T.A.SHAJI THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B. Koshy & K. Hema, JJ. -------------------------------------- Writ Appeal No. 82 of 2008 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2008 Judgment Koshy,J. Government engaged the writ petitioner in various land acquisition cases, but, his fees was not paid so far, even though all the details were furnished. In view of the undue delay, petitioner approached this court. Contention of the Government was that the cases mentioned by the petitioner are all land acquisition cases and, therefore, appellant has to get the money from the requisitioning authorities. The requisitioning authorities did not engage the petitioner who was a Government Pleader at that time. He appeared in those cases only because he was engaged by the Government and it is the duty of the Government to pay the amount. Therefore, we see no ground to interfere with the judgment. The question whether the Government will be able to get reimbursement from the requisitioning authorities or not is not a matter for the advocate. It is for the Government to take appropriate action. But, Government has to pay fees to the advocate and there is no reason for denying or delaying the same. W.A. No. 82/2008 2 2. It is stated that Government undertook the payment within two weeks after paying some amount. Even that was not paid and this writ appeal was filed only when contempt petition was filed. We see no ground to interfere with the impugned judgment. The appeal is dismissed. However, we grant time up to 28.2.2008 for payment of the amount. No further time will be granted on any count. J.B.Koshy Judge K. Hema Judge vaa W.A. No. 82/2008 3 J.B. KOSHY AND K.HEMA ,JJ. ------------------------------------- W.A.No. 82 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Judgment Dated:22nd January, 2008