- (1.) These intra court appeals are directed against order dated 5.5.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, whereby while disposing of the stay petitions preferred by the respondents-writ petitioners, the interim relief has been granted in their favour as under: "(i) the respondents shall not terminate petitioners' contract on account of non-payment of the amount pertaining to the lock-down period. In case, any order terminating their contract has been issued, the same shall remain in abeyance; (ii) The petitioners will nevertheless be required to clear all their dues (upto 22.3.2020) within a period of 7 days from today. Details of such amount will be provided by the State within a period of three days to each of the petitioners; (iii) As and when the situation is conducive for collection of excess royalty etc., the State will issue specific order to each of the petitioners, requiring/permitting them to commence the collection in furtherance of their respective contracts; (iv) Until the State issues such order, the petitioners or their agents will not be permitted to collect amount of excess royalty, DMFT etc.; (v) While issuing fresh order(s) for starting collection, the State shall give at least 15 days' moratorium to the concerned contractors to deposit the advance monthly installment. In other words, once the collection activities are recommenced, for a period of 15 days, the contract will be allowed to operate, without insisting upon payment of advance monthly installment; (vi) In case the respondents have invoked the bank guarantee or has written letter(s) to the Bank for encashment of the bank guarantee and/or performance security, the same shall remain in abeyance. It will be obligatory of the respondents to withdraw such letters orders, if issued."
(2.) A coordinate Bench of this Court while disposing of a bunch of intra court appeals preferred by the various entrepreneurs against the identical orders passed by the learned Single Judge, being D.B.Special Appeal (Writ) No.301/2020 and other connected appeals, vide order dated 29.5.2020 modified the order under appeal, in the following terms: "Thus, we deem it fit to direct that the collection of royalty amount under the contracts in question shall be commenced within a period of three days from today. The writ petitioners (respondents herein) shall clear off their outstanding dues if any (upto 22.3.2020) within a period of three days thereafter failing which, consequences shall flow as per the stipulations in the contracts. The issue regarding penalty/interest imposed upon the contractors by the State Government shall be open to deliberation/adjudication by the learned Single Bench in the pending writ petitions. Clause (iii) of the interim stay orders shall stand modified in the term that there shall be no requirement for the State Government to issue specific order to each writ petitioner requiring/permitting them to commence the collection of royalty in furtherance of the respective contract. As a consequence, the direction given by learned Single Bench ion Clause (v) of the interim stay orders requiring the State to give 15 days moratorium to the concerned contractor is set aside. All the single bench writ petitions shall be listed by the Registry on the scheduled date/s. We request the learned Single Bench to decide the matters at the earliest. The parties shall be at liberty to raise all permissible objections/submissions before the learned Single Bench who shall adjudicate the same without being prejudiced by any of the observations made hereinabove. With the above modifications in the interim stay orders passed by the learned Single Bench, the appeals are disposed of."
(3.) As a matter of fact, these intra court appeals were also heard alongwith D.B.Special Appeal (Writ) No.301/2020 and other connected appeals on 28.5.2020 and the matters were listed for pronouncement of order on 29.5.2020. However, Mr.O.P. Mehta, learned counsel appearing for the respondents made a statement before the Court that in place of Mr. Nitesh Mathur, now he has been appointed as counsel on behalf of the respondents and the instructions earlier given to the counsel appearing stands withdrawn. Accordingly, vide order dated 29.5.20202 passed by a coordinate Bench, these matters were directed to be detached from the bunch of the appeals disposed as aforesaid. The order reads as under: "This Court is constrained to observe that these six appeals were listed in this Court yesterday i.e. on 28.5.2020 and extensive arguments were raised by the respective counsel representing the parties. Mr. Nitesh Mathur, Advocate put in appearance on behalf of the respondents in the present set of appeals through Jitsi Meet App and with consent of the learned counsel, the matters were heard finally. The order was to be pronounced today. At this stage, Shri O.P.Mehta, Advocate informed this Court that now he has been engaged by the respondents in these matters and he would like to address the Court. Mr. Nitesh Mathur, Advocate was connected through video conferencing and he had agreed that previously he was instructed to argue the matters on behalf of the respondents but now the instructions have been withdrawn. We are compelled to record our displeasure on the manner in which the concerned advocates have conducted the matters. Be that as it may. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances noted above, we hereby direct that these six matters shall be detached from the bunch of appeals and shall be listed on 4.6.2020.";