RAM DHYAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS special appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the learned single Judge dated 10.3.2004.

(2.) HEARD Shri Ramendra Asthana learned counsel for the appellant and the learned standing counsel for the respondents.

(3.) THERE is an office report that the special appeal is not maintainable in view of the decisions of this Court in Vajara Yojna Seed Farm Kalyanpur and Ors. v. Presiding Officer, labour court -II, U. P. Kanpur and Anr., 2003 UPLBEC 496 and Sita Ram Lal v. District Inspector of Schools, Azamgarh and Ors., 1994 ACJ 180. These decisions have referred to Chapter VIII. Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules which states that an appeal lies against the judgment of a learned single Judge under Article 226 of the Constitution except when the writ petition was filed against such judgment or order or award (a) of a Tribunal, Court or statutory arbitrator, (b) of the Government or any Officer or authority, made or purported to be made in the exercise or purported exercise of appellate or revisional jurisdiction under any such Act mentioned in Chapter VIII, Rule 5. In this case, the writ petition filed before . the learned single Judge was against the order of the Commissioner who decided the appeal provided for under the Government order dated 3.7.1990. Thus, the impugned judgment before the learned single Judge, was not against an order of a Tribunal or Court or statutory arbitrator. It was also not against an order passed in exercise of appellate or revisional jurisdiction 'conferred by some Act'. In fact, the appellate jurisdiction was conferred by a Government order and not by an Act. Hence, in our opinion this special appeal is maintainable.