PARESH TRIPATHI Vs. SMT. RACHNA TONK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this Special Appeal, we are called upon to answer a very precarious question, which has been posed by the appellant i.e. Mr. Paresh Tripathi, the Chief Standing Counsel of High Court of Uttarakhand, Nainital. The appellant, in this Special Appeal, has given challenge to the orders dated 15.05.2018 and 29.05.2018, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition (S/S) No. 2573 of 2017 "Smt. Rachna Tonk Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others", where during the course of the proceedings of the writ petition, it is contended that learned Single Judge has made certain observations and recorded findings against the appellant, regarding his professional conduct and mode of his carrying the office of Chief Standing Counsel.

(2.) Principally, the petitioner to the writ petition had filed the writ petition for the following reliefs: "

(3.) Though, we being conscious that the merits of the writ petition are not required to dealt by us, while the appellant challenges the impugned orders in appeal, but for a logical scrutiny to the impugned orders in the appeal, were required to have a birds eye view of the case to conclude a to whether at all it was necessary for the learned Single Judge to pass the order impugned in the appeal, particularly, when the Writ Petition itself was yet to be decided on merits and is pending consideration.