Leave to amend and state the number of Civil Application. Heard learned Advocate Mr.M.K.Vakharia for the appellant in LPA No.1584 of 2010 and learned Advocate Ms.Mita Panchal for the appellant in LPA Nos.1587 to 1590 of 2012.
2. The present LPAs are filed being aggrieved by orders dated 28.04.2010 and 22.06.2010 in Civil Application No.5605 of 2010 and other similar matters, as well as order dated 17.06.2010 passed in Civil Application No.5924 of 2010. It is prayed that a direction be given to the State Government to furnish necessary details for processing the proposal dated 14.05.2010 and disburse the amount as per the new scheme (IEDSS) in the interest of justice.
3. Learned Advocates for the appellants submitted that after the order was passed on 28.04.2010 in all these matters (SCA No.365 of 2010 and other matters), the Central Government has already disbursed an amount of Rs.34,44,92,150/- to the State Government, who in turn is to give it to the Trust concerned and the Trust concerned will in turn disburse the same to the Teachers as was required.
3.1 Besides, learned Advocates for the appellants submitted that the main matters are pending for final hearing and are fixed for final hearing in the first week of May 2012.
3.2 Learned Advocate for the appellants submitted that besides other contentions, one of the contentions in these LPAs is about para-4 in order dated 22.06.2010, which reads as under:-
“4. In view of the above, these applications are rejected. A cost of Rs.10,000/- [Rupees Ten thousand only] in each of the applications is imposed on the Under Secretary (IE), Ministry of H.R.D., New Delhi, who has affirmed the present applications. The main matters to be listed for hearing on 29.06.2010.”
(emphasis supplied)
3.3 Learned Advocates for the appellants invited attention of the Court to the application, a copy of which is produced at Annexure-B colly., page No.51 in LPA No.1584 of 2010. Learned Advocate for the appellants submitted that it is true that the said application was third consecutive application in the main matter, but that was in light of the facts of the case and as set out in para-7 of that application, the State Government had sought for an amount of Rs.16,89,28,590/- in a revised proposal. It was in light of that revised proposal that the aforesaid application was required to be filed. Learned Advocates for the appellants submitted that on perusal of the contents of the application, it will be clear that there was nothing which could be attributed to the concerned officer who had affirmed the said application/s and therefore, awarding of cost against an individual officer was not warranted. Besides, Rs.10,000/- in each of the applications works out to a huge amount.
4. On examination of the LPAs, this Court is of the considered opinion that the same are not required to be entertained in light of the fact that the main matters are already fixed for final hearing in the first week of May 2012. However, learned Advocate for the appellants are able to convince the Court on the aspect of award of cost against an individual officer, more particular in light of the contents of the application/s.
5. In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court is of the opinion that the LPAs are required to be entertained and allowed so far as award of cost is concerned.
6. ADMIT. Learned AGP Mr.R.A.Rindani waives service of notice of admission on behalf of opponent No.1-State.
With the consent of the learned Advocates, the appeals are taken up for final hearing.
7. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the appeals are allowed to a limited extent of direction with regard to awarding of cost against an individual officer.
At the request of the learned Advocates for the appellants, it is clarified that the Court has not examined any other contention raised in these appeals. It will be open for the appellants to agitate all other issues before the Court when the matters are taken up for final hearing.
(Ravi R.Tripathi, J.) *Shitole (G.B.Shah, J.)