SHAH JAMAL SHEIKH Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents on record.

(2.) This writ appeal has been filed being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 3.7.2014 passed in Review Petition No. 14/2013 filed against the order passed in WP(C) No. 167/2013 by learned Single Judge. By the impugned judgment and order dated 03.07.2014 learned Single Judge has recalled the order dated 27.8.2013 passed in the aforesaid writ petition and has imposed the costs of Rs. 50,000/ - (Rupees fifty thousand) for suppression of material facts. The costs have been made payable to Registrar General of this Court within a period of 2(two) months from the date of impugned order. There is a use of improper words for learned Single Judge in the drafting of grounds of this writ appeal which require a serious notice of this Court. The grounds so pleaded are reproduced hereinbelow:

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is a man of modest financial means, and he is surviving somehow from his earning as Secretary of the School which is an elected post. Learned counsel submits that the costs amount is excessive and if the same is not interfered, it would be almost impossible for the petitioner to deposit the same. In support of his contention, learned counsel, inter alia, relied on the judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court in Shivdeo Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Ors AIR (1963) SC 1908 in particular para 8), to argue that the High Court can review its order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by invoking its such powers.