K.HARIRAYA KAMATH Vs. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It was submitted on behalf of the respondents that the petitioners have filed appeals against the orders challenged in these petitions, before the S.T.A.T. and that these appeals are pending consideration before that Tribunal. In view of this circumstance I do not think that I should deal with these petitions. If the decision of the S.T.A.T. is against the petitioners, it will be open to them to approach this Court with writ petitions, if so advised.

(2.) Petitioners' counsel argued that it is open to this Court to interfere in a case where the order impugned is one passed without jurisdiction and that in such a case the pendency of an appeal against the order is no bar to this Court dealing with the matter. In support of that, he referred me to the following passage in 'Jurisdiction and Illegality', page 50. by Annon Rubinstein.

(3.) Although I see great force in the contention of counsel that if an order is a nullity, the fact that an appeal is pending against that order is no bar to this Court entertaining a petition under Art.226. I do not think it necessary to decide that question in these petitions.