M MANOHAR REDDY Vs. GOVERNMENT OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner was appointed as Standing Counsel for the Municipalities in Andhra Area to represent them in the A.P. Administrative Tribunal from 2004 to 2010. Recently, his term expired. The grievance of the Petitioner is that Respondent Nos. 3 to 41 did not pay the fee payable to him for conducting various cases on behalf of the Respondents. He is said to have issued notices to the respective Municipalities requiring them to pay the dues of professional fee. His grievance is that no steps were taken thereon.

(2.) Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Counsel for the Respondents.

(3.) It is a matter of record that the Petitioner was appointed as Standing Counsel to represent the Municipalities in Andhra Area in the A.P. Administrative Tribunal. It is but natural that he must be paid the stipulated fee for the cases conducted by him. The notices were issued by the Petitioner in December, 2010. Though it cannot be said that there was undue delay on the part of Respondent Nos. 3 to 41, the payment cannot be withheld for unreasonable time.