C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.

1. These Writ Appeals are filed under leave obtained from this court by the appellant which was not a party in the Writ Petition. We have heard Sri. T.A. Shaji, counsel

appearing for the appellant, various counsel appearing for the respondents and also the Government Pleader appearing for the State and the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal.

2. The facts leading to the controversy and the nature of dispute raised are the following. Section 76 of the Kerala Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1959 (hereinafter called “the Act”) provides for constitution of a Legal Benefit Fund by the Government and funding of the same through collection of an additional court fee. Even though the said provision was in the statute from 1962 onwards, Government framed Kerala Legal Benefit Fund Rules in exercise of powers conferred on it under sub-section (4) of Section 76 only in 1991. It is much thereafter i.e. in the year 2002, the appellant-trust was created by the Government under Section 76(2) of the Act through SRO No.225/2002. Simultaneous with the creation of the appellant-trust, Government issued order under Section 76(1) of the Act providing for collection of additional court fee at specified rates recoverable for the benefit of the appellant-trust. Both the notifications under sub-section (2) and sub-section (1) above stated creating the appellant-trust fund and providing for collection of additional court fee towards contribution to the Legal Benefit Fund were made effective from 5.4.2002. As a result of these statutory orders issued by the Government, every appeal or revision filed before Tribunals or Appellate/Revisional Authorities other than in civil courts and criminal courts in the State had to carry stamp for the value of the additional court fee stated in the Government Orders above referred, which is at the rate of 0.5% of the amount involved in the dispute wherever it is capable of valuation or otherwise, Rs.50/-. Even though the statutory limit was upto 1% of the amount of dispute involved or Rs.100/- as the case may be, Government while issuing Notification on 5.4.2002 limited it to 0.5% of the value of dispute and Rs.50/- in other cases towards Legal Benefit Fund payable by the litigants filing appeals and revisions. When the levy was effectively introduced through Notifications above referred, several litigations were filed by various parties in this court wherein the constitutional validity of Section 76 of the Act was questioned and along with it the validity of the Government Orders providing for the levy and collection of Legal Benefit Fund in the form of additional court fee. The learned Single Judge in a batch of cases upheld the constitutional validity of the levy but declared that for the purpose of collection of the Legal Benefit Fund in the form of additional court fee liability is only for appeals or revisions filed in respect of any orders issued from the assessment year 2002-2003 onwards. In other words, under the judgment, for appeals or revisions filed against any assessment, penalty or any proceeding issued or pertaining to any order relating to any assessment year upto and including 2001-2002, there was no liability for payment of Legal benefit Fund in the form of additional court fee. So much so, the effective operation of the Government Orders is deferred by this court from the date of Notification i.e. from 5.4.2002 until such time an appeal or revision is filed in respect of any order relating to assessment year 2002-2003 or any subsequent assessment year. The State has not filed any appeal against the judgment probably because constitutional validity of the Section and the government Orders authorising collection of Legal Benefit Fund in the form of additional court fee from litigants is sustained by this court, though with a rider that it does not apply for appeal or revision pertaining to any assessment year upto and including 2001-2002. On appeals filed by the par