- (1.) Heard the petitioner who is appearing in person.
(2.) This writ application was filed by the petitioner praying the following reliefs : "(a) A writ in the nature of Mandamus do issue commanding and/or directing the respondent No. 3 and/or respondents and each of them and their servants and/or agents to forthwith make over payment of all long outstanding fee bills of the petitioner with interest and costs; (b) A writ in the nature of prohibition commanding the respondents and/or their servants prohibiting themselves from giving any effect to the said impugned letter 11-12-1997 in respect of all final bills of Advocate in the Arbitration case Dilip Kumar Dutta v. F.C.I. sanctioning Rs. 9956-00 only in place of Rs. 40,459-50 in respect of fee and cost bills; (d) Rule NISI in terms of prayers (a) (b) and (c) above; (c) Order for payment of interest the costs of Litigation expenses; (f) Such further relief and/or reliefs; "
(3.) It is the submission of the petitioner who is the learned advocate of this Court, appearing in person, that despite rendering of professional service to the Food Corporation of India as empanelled advocate of the said Corporation all the bills as submitted has not been fully paid. The petitioner has filed a supplementary affidavit giving the details of the bills and the amount as still payable. It has been further contended by the petitioner that the taxi fare though was agreed upon to be paid has not been paid. It is also another case of the petitioner that since he was engaged to deal with the taxation matters his fees cannot be equated with the shipping matter. In a nutshell the entire writ application is based on the factual matrix that the petitioner has not been paid proper fees with reference to the duty as discharged by him.;