S MANOHAR CHETTIAR Vs. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard learned counsel for the appellant at length and we are satisfied that there is hardly any scope of interference except for the fact that the challenge raised appears to be limited in respect of the imposition of the condition of remittance of Rs.10 lakhs as an advance towards stated arrears of annual contribution and audit fee, which is yet to be computed, for which orders have to be passed in the impugned judgment itself. Learned counsel submits that this onerous condition of deposit of Rs.10 lakhs is not justified in the background of the case, more so, when the matter is yet to be disposed of in terms of the judgment itself.

(2.) We have also heard Mr.A.K.Sriram, learned counsel for the Executive Officer / 3 rd respondent and Mr.Vineet Subramani, learned counsel for the fifth and sixth respondents.

(3.) The aforesaid submission need not detain this Court as the learned counsel for the appellant has accepted the proposal of the Court to deposit a sum of Rs.3 lakhs instead of Rs.10 lakhs as directed by the learned single Judge.