Today, On 12th March, The Supreme Court dismissed Advocate Ashok Pandey’s petition seeking Rs 1 crore from the Union Government. He claimed the amount was for fees and expenses for cases he filed to “save” former Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra.
The Supreme Court dismissed a petition from Advocate Ashok Pandey, who sought Rs.1 crore in fees and expenses he claimed to have incurred while defending former Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra against “humiliation, torture, removal” through multiple legal cases.
A bench consisting of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi described the petition as “totally misconceived.”
The court noted that if the petitioner’s actions were meant to safeguard the institution, then such “social service cannot be assigned a monetary value.
Chief Justice Surya Kant responded with irritation, asking,
“After making all sorts of nasty allegations against a CJI, why are you using ‘honourable’ now?”
Advocate Pandey had approached the Supreme Court via a Special Leave Petition (SLP) to challenge the Allahabad High Court’s decision.
He mentioned in court that he borrowed INR 2 lakhs from his daughter for legal expenses. He argued that during the impeachment proceedings, neither the Attorney General nor the Solicitor General had come forward to assist.
The CJI acknowledged Pandey’s efforts, stating,
“We thank you for the social service you provided to the institution..Claim has rightly been rejected by the High Court. Totally misconceived, dismissed. Thank you.”
The High Court had previously rejected Pandey’s demand for Rs.1 crore in legal fees, indicating that there was no evidence to support his claim that he was engaged by the Ministry of Law and Justice to file cases on behalf of Justice Misra.
Justices Rajan Roy and Om Prakash Shukla noted,
“There is nothing on record to indicate that the Ministry of Law & Justice, Department of Legal Affairs (Judicial Section), Government of India had ever engaged the petitioner for filing the six cases, referred in the pleadings, therefore, in view of the reasons given in the communication dated 26.7.2024, we find absolutely no reason to grant the reliefs prayed for herein. The writ petition lacks merits and is dismissed.”
The High Court found no basis for Pandey’s claim, as the government never appointed him for legal representation.
A communication from the Ministry of Law & Justice confirmed that he was not part of the government’s panel of advocates and that he acted independently, thus making the government not liable for any fees or expenses he incurred.
During the hearings, Pandey insisted that he worked on these cases in the interest of justice and deserved compensation.
However, the court found no validity in his arguments. The judges noted the Ministry’s clear position and stated there was no legal requirement for reimbursement for cases not officially assigned.
The Ministry’s letter, which was reviewed by the High Court, mentioned that Pandey’s request had been forwarded to the Department of Justice and later to the President’s Secretariat but was ultimately deemed without merit.
The government emphasized that it had a designated panel of lawyers for legal matters, excluding Pandey.
When the High Court dismissed his petition, Pandey requested a certificate under Article 134-A of the Constitution to appeal to the Supreme Court.
The judges denied this request, stating that the case did not present any substantial constitutional issues or matters of significant public importance that necessitated further review.
Case Title: ASHOK PANDEY Vs UNION OF INDIA
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
