IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Review No 213 of 2008 Raj Kumar Mishra son of Sri Subedar Mishra, Resident of Village + Post - Dhanaw, P S - Baniayapur, District - Saran, At present C/o Sri A K Pandey, ESI Colony, Phase-1, Ambedkar Path, Bailey Road, Patna Post - B V College, Patna - 14, P S - Rupaspur, District - Patna, At Present 36, Lawyers Chambers, Bar Counsel Bhawan, Patna High Court, Patna - Petitioner 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 - 110 002 3 The Regional Director Employees State Insurance Corporation, Panchdeep Bhawan, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Patna - 800 001 4 The Deputy Regional Director (Legal) Employees State Insurance Corporation, Panchdeep Bhawan, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Patna 5 The Legal Inspector, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Panchdeep Bhawan, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Patna - 800 001-Respondents/Opp Parties *** For the petitioner : Mr Raj Kr Mishra (in person) For ESIC : Mr Anshuman, Advocate *** 4 26.03.2009 The petitioner is claiming to be an Advocate and claims his professional fee for the said purpose. He had filed a writ petition which, in my view, was not maintainable on the twin ground that there was serious controversy of fact and a writ petition for simple money claim does not lie. In view of disputed questions of fact, the writ petition was dismissed. This review application has been filed stating that on basis of information obtained under Right to Information Act, he has been able to know that factual controversy, as raised by the respondents, is not wholly correct. Be that as it may, the Court is being disinclined to entertain a 2 writ petition. It being a discretionary jurisdiction of this Court, no writ petition lies. The review application is dismissed. M.E.H./ (Navaniti Prasad Singh)