RAGHUBAR DAYAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner filed a writ petition in this Court which was dismissed summarily on June 13, 1972. Now, the peti tioner has filed the present application for re calling the aforesaid order on the ground that Sie vacation Judge sitting singly has no power to dismiss a writ petition summarily.

(2.) I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner but I am unable to agree with the submissions made by him. It has been contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that under Chapter V, Rule 10 of the Rules of the Court the Vacation Judge sitting singly is entitled to receive a civil miscellaneous writ petition, but is not entitl ed to dismiss it in view of the provisions con tained in Chapter XXII, Rule 1, or the Rules of the Court, which lays down that an appli cation for a direction or order or writ under Article 226 of the Constitution shall be made to the Division Bench appointed to receive applications or, on any day on which no such Bench is sitting, to the Judge appointed to receive applications in civil matters. It fur ther provides that in the latter event the Judge shall direct that the application be laid before a Division Bench for orders. It has been contended that if a_ Division Bench appointed to receive applications under Arti cle 226 is not sitting, the Judge appointed to receive applications in civil matters can only entertain a writ petition and has to direct it to be laid before a Division Bench for orders. It was argued that since during the vacation no Division Bench appointed to receive ap plications under Article 226 is sitting, the Vacation Judge can after entertaining a writ petition only direct it to be laid before a Bench for orders.

(3.) PARAGRAPH 1 of sub-clause (1) of Rule 10 of Chapter V lays down that crimi nal work shall continue to be dealt with du ring the vacation by such Judges as may be appointed for the purpose by the Chief Jus tice. During the vacation appointment is made of Vacation Judges by the Chief Jus tice for the purpose of dealing with criminal work. Under the second paragraph of R. 10 sub-clause (1) a discretion has been given to the Vacation Judge to exercise the original and appellate jurisdiction vested hi the Court in any miscellaneous matter. The High Court in dealing with writ petitions exercises origi nal jurisdiction and there is no doubt that a writ petition comes within the definition of a miscellaneous matter. Therefore, even though the Vacation Judge is not appointed for en tertaining a writ petition a discretion has been left with him to entertain a writ petition. Entertaining a writ petition necessarily in volves the power to hear and decide such a writ petition. Paragraph 3 of clause (1) of Rule 10 of Chapter V empowers a Vacation Judge sitting singly to exercise jurisdiction even in cases which are under the Rules cog nizable by two or more Judges, unless by any other law the case is required to be heard by more than one Judge. No other law to the contrary has been brought to my notice. In my opinion, therefore, the require ment of chapter XXII, Rule 1 that the Judge appointed to receive applications in civil mat ter shall only receive a writ petition and shall, thereafter direct it to be laid before a Division Bench, does not apply to a Vaca tion Judge.