IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.461 of 2009 4 10.8.2009 Raj Kumar Mishra Son of Sri Subedar Mishra Resident of Village + Post- Dhanaw, PS Baniyapur, District Saran, At present C/o- Sri A.K.Pandey, E.S.I. Colony, Phase-1, Ambedkar Path, Bailey Road, Patna, Post- B.V.College, Patna-14, PS Rupaspur District Patnaaaaaa, At present 36, Lawyers Chambers, Bar Council Bhawan, Patna High Court, Patna ..... Petitioner/ Appellant VERSUS 1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Labour and Employees Department, Government of India, New Delhi 2. The Director General, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Panchdeep Bhawan, Kotla Road, New Delhi- 110002 3. The Regional Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Panchdeep Bhawan, Jawaharlal Nehru Marg, Patna- 800001 4. The Deputy Regional Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Panchdeep Bhawan, Jawaharlal Nehru Marg, Patna 5. The Legal Inspector, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Panchdeep Bhawan, Jawaharlal Nehru Marg, Patna- 800001 ..... Respondents/ opposite parties. -------- For the appellant : Mr Raj Kumar Mishra, In-person For ESIC : Mr Anshuman, Advocate For UOI : Mr Rakesh Kumar Singh, CGC ------- After hearing the parties, we find that sufficient materials have been produced by the appellant to show that he was asked to inquire and report regarding the actual position of 300 old cases of the Corporation which were pending or supposed to be pending in different courts 2 at Patna Civil Court. These cases were either of the 1988 or of earlier years. There are also clear materials to show that a fee of Rs.50/- per case was agreed to be paid to the appellant, who is a lawyer, to find out the position of the old cases relating to the Corporation, as noticed above. He was paid an advance of Rs.500/- only. He made efforts and reported to the Corporation the position of 300 cases, many of which being old cases were already disposed of and even the records were destroyed. The Corporation is not satisfied, in absence of documentary evidence that the appellant had given correct information regarding the position of the cases. However, in the counter affidavit they could point out only two cases in which allegedly the factual position given by the appellant was found to be incorrect. The appellant has submitted a bill of Rs.15000/- towards fees and a further bill of Rs.19925/- towards cost or expenses. Out of the total bill of Rs.34925/- he has been paid only Rs.500/- by way of advance. 3 We do not find any clinching evidence to show what amount of expenses were involved in the whole exercise of finding position of the old cases nor there is any clinching evidence regarding any agreement in respect of payment of expenses at a particular rate. However, as found earlier there is clear evidence that appellant was promised to be paid @ Rs.50/- per case for obtaining necessary information in respect of 300 old cases and in fact, he found out their position and submitted a report to the Corporation. The fact that the Corporation is not satisfied in respect of report relating to two or three cases will not disentitle the appellant from getting his fees at the rate already agreed. Hence, in our view, the appellant is clearly entitled to be paid an amount of Rs.15000/- by way of fees which has been calculated @ Rs.50/- per case for 300 cases. Out of that he has been paid only Rs.500/- by way of advance. Hence, he is entitled to get further amount of Rs.14500/- towards promised fees. The Corporation being an instrumentality of Union of India and therefore, a State, is expected to act fairly. It must pay aforesaid balance dues towards professional fees of the 4 appellant within a period of four weeks from today. So far as appellant’s claim for Rs.19925/- by way of expenses is concerned, we are unable to decide that issue because of various disputes and complications involved in deciding matters relating only to facts. Writ jurisdiction would not be appropriate for deciding such a claim. Hence, in respect of his claim for Rs.19925/- the appellant cannot be granted any relief in the present proceeding. If so advised, he may pursue his claim in respect of his bill for expenses amounting to Rs.19925/- through an appropriate civil proceeding before the civil court. The appeal is finally disposed of. (Shiva Kirti Singh, ACJ) (Anjana Prakash, J.) sk