On Monday, Justice DY Chandrachud told a lawyer that he should not ask for his fee as he appears as an Amicus Curiae and does it as a service to the institution.
A Division Bench comprising Hon’ble Justice DY Chandrachud and Hon’ble Justice M.R Shah was considering a petition under Article 32 by the petitioner, who is an advocate, for recovering his dues amounting to Rs. 24,000 from UP and Jharkhand government wherein she appeared as Amicus. He also sought Rs. Five lakh as compensation.
Hon’ble Justice Chandrachud remarked that the lawyer could not use Article 32 for recovery of his dues at the outset.
The Counsel remarked that there is no effective recovery.
The Bench also remarked why he had asked for a five lakh compensation. The Counsel replied that his fees had been delayed for five years, and the state government was not responding to his emails.
However, the Court stated that he could not come under Article 32 and benefit from an appropriate remedy.
The Bench also noted that he had asked for compensation which was misconceived in Court’s opinion for some inexplicable reason.
Lastly, the Bench remedy was to not ask for a fee when he appears as Amicus, and he should do it as the service to the institution. He further remarked that it was the standard practice when he was practising law.