Advocate Cannot Use a Writ Petition to Recover Fees from a Client, it is a Contractual Matter : MP High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution filed by a lawyer seeking unpaid legal fees from the State Agricultural Marketing Board since 2017. 

The Court said that the advocate-client relationship is contractual and disputes over professional fees must be raised in civil courts, not through writ jurisdiction.

Relying on Supreme Court rulings in Ropar v. Tejinder Singh Gujral and New India Assurance Co. v. A.K. Saxena, the Court said writs can’t be used to recover contract-based dues.

The petitioner was allowed to approach the appropriate civil forum for recovery of his fees. (Ashok Airen v Family Welfare & Agriculture Department)