LODHA, J. - (1.) THIS group of four appeal arises from the order dated 8th March, 2007 passed by the Single Judge whereby he disposed of two writ petitions being (i) Civil Writ Petition No. 2749/2005, Rajasthan Indian Medicine Board Karamchari Sangh vs. Board of Indian Medicine,rajasthan, Jaipur and another; and (ii) Civil Writ Petition No. 3763/2006, Jagdish Prasad Sharma (LDC) vs. Board of Indian Medicine, Rajasthan, Jaipur & another. Out of this group of four appeals, two appeals are at the instance of the Board of Indian Medicine, Rajasthan, Jaipur. The other two appeals are at the instance of the State Government.
(2.) AT the out-set Mr. Sandeep Pathak, advocate for Mr. Bharat Vyas, Additional Advocate General prayed for time on the ground of non-availability of Mr. Bharat Vyas. The prayer for adjournment was seriously opposed by Mr. R. C. Joshi, counsel for the contesting respondent. He invited our attention to the proceedings, particularly that took place on 21. 2. 2008, 24. 3. 2008, 11. 4. 2008 and 22. 4. 2008 and submitted that the prayer for adjournment on behalf of Mr. Bharat Vyas is unreasonable. On 21st February, 2008, Mr. Sandeep Pathak, brief holder appeared for Mr. Bharat Vyas and prayed for time. The order dated 21st February, 2008 reads thus:      " Mr. Sandeep Pathak, brief holder for Mr. Bharat Vyas Additional Advocate General prays for time which is not objected to by the counsel representing the other side. 2. The appeal is, accordingly adjourned for one week. " Then on 24th March, 2008, Mr. Hukam Chand Saini advocate appeared for Mr. K. N. Sharma and sought time on his behalf due to eye operation of his father. The matter was, accordingly, adjourned. The order dated 24th March, 2008 reads thus: Mr. Hukam Chand Saini advocate appears and submits that Mr. K. N. Sharma, the counsel for the appellant is not available due to eye operation of his father. He prays for time. 2. Stand over to 9th April, 2008". On 11th April, 2008 again a prayer for adjournment was made by Mr. Bharat Vyas. As last indulgence, the Bench granted time and matter was ordered to be posted on 15th April, 2008 making it clear that no request for adjournment shall be entertained on that date. The order dated 11th April, 2008 reads thus:      " As last indulgence, put up on 15. 4. 2008, as prayed for by learned Additional Advocate General. It is made clear that on no ground these matters would be adjourned on 15. 4. 2008. " Although, there was an order that no prayer for adjournment shall be entertained yet on 22nd April, 2008, the request for adjournment was made because of indisposition of Mr. Bharat Vyas. Keeping this aspect into consideration, the matter was adjourned for today. The order dated 22nd April, 2008 reads thus:      " Mr. K. N. Sharma, counsel for the appellant submits that State has also preferred appeals being SAW No. 1448/2007 and 1471/2007 challenging the impugned order and on behalf of the State Mr. Bharat Vyas, Additional Advocate General is to argue those appeals but because of his indisposition, he has not been able to come to the Court. He, therefore, prays for time. 2. For the stated reason, let the appeals be posted for admission on 25th April, 2008. "
(3.) THE request for adjournment, thus, made today by Mr. Sandeep Pathak for and on behalf of Mr. Bharat Vyas is highly unreasonable. We, accordingly, reject the prayer for adjournment. Mr. Sandeep Pathak for Mr. Bharat Vyas and Mr. K. N. Sharma were then asked to argue the matter and so also Mr. R. C. Joshi, counsel for the contesting respondent. We heard the advocates for the parties. ;