ARVIND KUMAR JAIN Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On a preliminary objection advanced by the learned counsel for the respondents that the writ appeal preferred against the order dated 12.1.2007 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.17241/2006 is not maintainable being hit by the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 2 of the M.P.Uchcha Nyaylaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 (for brevity 'the Act') a Division Bench hearing the appeal noticed that there are two sets of decisions pertaining to maintainability of an appeal under the Act in respect of interlocutory orders, (i) holding that the appeals are maintainable under certain circumstances and (ii) the other that no writ appeal would lie against any interlocutory order as the bar created by the proviso appended to Section 2 of the Act would come into play. Because of this situation the Division Bench has recommended the following question for adjudication by a larger Bench:-

(2.) In W.A.No.69/2007 [Nav Nirman (Milan) Deria Vs. State of M.P. (decided on 15.1.2007)] a Division Bench has expressed the opinion as under :

(3.) In W.A.No.671/2007 [Shri Tejpal Singh and another Vs. Central Bank of India and others (decided on 25.4.2007)] another Division Bench referred to certain decisions of the Apex Court and expressed the opinion as under :