Pre-deposit waiver in identical connected appeals set aside where inconsistent Tribunal orders created arbitrary disparity.

Where connected appeals arise from identical facts and issues, insistence on a consolidated pre-deposit before hearing can be arbitrary if a coordinate bench has already waived pre-deposit or decided a connected appeal on merits. The High Court noted that the Tribunal had taken divergent approaches within a short span in the same set of matters, creating unequal treatment among similarly placed appellants. It therefore set aside the pre-deposit direction and required the remaining appeals to be heard on merits without insisting on any pre-deposit.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order directing pre-deposit of Rs. 25 lakhs for hearing the appeals was liable to be set aside in view of earlier orders in identical appeals arising from the same set of facts.

Analysis: The appeals were founded on identical subject matter and facts, yet the Tribunal had taken divergent approaches within a span of two days, including one order suspending pre-deposit entirely and allowing an appeal on merits. In such circumstances, requiring deposit of a consolidated sum before hearing would serve no useful purpose and would create an arbitrary disparity in treatment, especially when other connected appeals had already been heard on merits.

Conclusion: The pre-deposit order was set aside and the appeals were directed to be heard on merits without insisting on any pre-deposit.

Ratio Decidendi: Where connected appeals involve identical facts and issues, and a coordinate bench has already granted relief or waived pre-deposit in the same matter, insistence on pre-deposit in the remaining appeals is arbitrary and may be set aside to secure parity.

---