[2026:RJ-JP:3259]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1115/2016 Raghuveer Singh Jatav Son Of Shri Ram Charan, aged 30 years, Resident C/o Court Campus Hindauncity, District Karauli.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Local Self Govt. Department, Govt. Of, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. Assistant Legal Remembrancer, Local Self Govt.

Department, Directorate, Near Civil Lines, Jaipur.

3. District Collector, Karauli.

4. Chairman/commissioner, Nagar Parishad, Hindauncity, District Karauli.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Hardev Puri Goswami For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sharad Joshi, AGC HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN

Order

23/01/2026

1. Instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with following prayers:

“It is, therefore, humbly prayed that your Lordships may graciously be pleased to accept and allow this writ petition and by an lordships may graciously be pleased to accept appropriate writ order or direction in the nature thereof: - (i) The respondents may kindly be directed to give/pay remuneration/ fees and expenses of retainership as a Legal Advisor since 9.9.2013 till date of realization @ Rs. 8500/- per month total a sum of Rs. 2,38,000/- interest @ 24% p.a., (ii) Any other appropriate order which may be found just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case be passed in favour of the Petitioner.”

2. The contention of the petitioner is that he is an advocate and engaged by Municipal Body, Hindaun City, District Karauli to render advise to Municipal Council but despite rendering services, no payment has been made to him either by the Municipal Body or by Department of Local Self Government.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as a legal advisor for conducting cases of respondent No.1, but during the term of appointment, respondent No. 4, has not been paid any remuneration and expenses in lieu of services rendered by the petitioner. He further submitted that despite notice to respondents, no remuneration has been paid to the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner is a qualified lawyer and was appointed as legal advisor purely on merits, thus, it is the responsibility of the respondents to pay professional charges to the petitioner. He also submitted usually due to clerical or other reasons, the payment towards professional charges has been either withheld or delayed by the Government Departments and instrumentalities of the State.

5. During the course of arguments, several other Advocates, present before this Court raised grievance of non-payment and delayed payment by the Government Departments and the instrumentalities of the State. They also apprised the Court that after change of Government or the panel, the officials used to block or delay payment of previously engaged lawyers. They also apprised the Court that many of the lawyers are engaged full-time by the Government Departments or the instrumentalities, but still the payment has not been made to them, and it is a larger issue affecting livelihood of the lawyers.

6. An identical issue was considered by a Coordinate Bench of the Delhi High Court in Anjana Gosain v. Government of NCT & Another, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 2506/2019, order dated 26.07.2024. The importance of legal profession is reproduced in following paragraphs:-

2. Legal profession involves three main participants–

litigants, lawyers and Judges. Litigation lawyers usually do not earn salaries and are usually engaged by litigants, for a fee, to represent them before Judges. Some lawyers earn monthly retainers or consultancies when they are regularly engaged by litigants who have steady flow of work.

3. One of the most important litigants in Courts across the country are the governments, PSUs and other government bodies. They usually have a panel of lawyers to represent them before various Courts and tribunals. Such