S K Dholakia v. State Of Maharashtra And 2 ORS.

(903)-WP-2961-2014.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2961 OF 2014 S. K. Dholakia ..Petitioner

Versus

State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents WITH CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.228 OF 2015 IN WRIT PETITION 2961 OF 2014 B. H. Maralpalle ..Applicant

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN

S. K. Dholakia ..Petitioner

Versus

State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents Mr. Sumit Phatale I/by Mr. Chinmaya Acharya, Advocate for the Petitioner.

Mr. H. S. Venegavkar, Addl. Govt. Pleader for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 - State.

CORAM : B. R. GAVAI & DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JJ.

DATE : 18th APRIL 2019 P.C.

1] The Petitioner, a learned Senior Counsel, defended the State before the Supreme Court, but did not get his professional fees paid. Aggrieved, he filed this Writ Petition.

BGP. 1 of 2

(903)-WP-2961-2014.

2] After about five years, especially after this Court's expressing its displeasure at the way a learned counsel was dragged to court to have his fee paid, now the learned Addl. Govt Pleader reports to the Court that the dispute has been settled and the petitioner has been paid. 3] The petitioner's counsel does admit that the petitioner has been paid, though according to him, there is some minor discrepancy in the quantification. At any rate, he seeks a direction to the Government to provide to the Petitioner with TDS forms at the earliest. In that context, the learned AGP assures the Court that the petitioner would be provided those statutory documents expeditiously. We reckon, with these developments, nothing survives in this writ petition. So we close it. 4] In view of disposal of Writ Petition, the Chamber Summons does not survive and is accordingly disposed of. [DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.] [B. R. GAVAI, J.] BGP. 2 of 2