PANKAJ KHANNA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Notice to the respondent to show cause as to why rule nisi be not issued.

(2.) Mr. Neeraj Jain accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.

(3.) Petitioner assails the impugned Order dated 16.2,2004 whereby petitioner has been asked to deposit :Rs.50,000/- within three weeks as pre-deposit for hearing of his appeal simply on the basis that petitioner can afford to pay the same as his residence is at New Rajinder Nagar. There is no finding that petitioner is the owner or tenant in the premises. This is despite evidence of petitioner's financial hardship in terms of Income tax returns being produced. There is merit in the submission. Learned counsel for the respondent fairly does not oppose the same.