The Kerala High Court has directed the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) to pay the outstanding legal fees of Late Advocate V.M. Kurian, who served as Standing Counsel for nearly two decades. Holding the conduct of the NCTE as “blameworthy,” the Court also imposed a cost of ₹50,000 on the institution for arbitrarily denying payment for legal services rendered.
Background
The petitioner, Advocate Mathew B. Kurian, son of Late Advocate V.M. Kurian, filed the writ petition seeking payment of professional fees amounting to ₹12,11,770/- for over 590 cases conducted on behalf of NCTE by his late father from 2000 to 2018. The petition stated that despite repeated requests and the submission of bills, the dues remained unpaid even after the appointment of a new counsel in April 2018.
Respondents’ Arguments
The third respondent, the Regional Director of NCTE, submitted that:
- Certain bills required classification details, case status, and supporting documents as per the guidelines issued in December 2017 (Exhibit R3(b)).
- Some cases listed in the petitioner’s bills either did not involve NCTE, were duplicated, or had discrepancies in billing dates.
- Certified copies of judgments were not submitted in several cases.
- Payments had already been made in some cases.
Petitioner’s Clarifications
The petitioner clarified:
- The bills in question relate to a period prior to the issuance of Exhibit R3(b) guidelines and should not be subjected to those conditions.
- For cases after 28.12.2017, he agreed to comply with the revised guidelines.
- Judgment copies had already been forwarded to NCTE.
- Several explanations were provided for each category of objections raised by the NCTE, and no substantial documentary proof of prior payment or objections was produced by the respondents.
Court’s Observations
Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. relied on Rules 11, 12, 28, 29, and 38 of the Bar Council of India Rules to affirm the advocate’s right to fair compensation. The Court held:
“If a client agrees to pay and then refuses after receiving services, such conduct is unjustifiable and condemnable.”
The Court rejected NCTE’s contention that the writ petition was not maintainable due to disputed facts. Citing Govt. of Tamil Nadu v. R. Thillaivillalan [AIR 1991 SC 1231] and James Koshy v. KSRTC [1999 (3) KLT 533], the Court reiterated that petitions by advocates seeking unpaid fees from State agencies are maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution, unless they involve complex factual adjudications.
It noted that:
- There was no dispute that Late V.M. Kurian was engaged and had appeared in all the disposed cases.
- Only ten cases involved errors in listing NCTE as a party.
- No proof was placed on record by NCTE to justify withholding payments for the remaining cases.
Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition with the following directions:
- NCTE must pay the professional fees for all cases listed in Tables C, D, E, F, and G within two months.
- NCTE may seek clarifications regarding Table E within two weeks, to which the petitioner must respond within the next two weeks.
- A cost of ₹50,000 is imposed on the NCTE for its arbitrary denial of dues.
Legal Representation
- For Petitioner: Advocate Jacob Sebastian
- For Respondents: Dr. Abraham P. Meachinkara, Standing Counsel for NCTE
Case Title: Mathew B. Kurian vs National Council for Teacher Education & Ors.
Writ Petition No.: WP(C) No. 34764 of 2018
