ASSAM STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. SURYA KANTA ROY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FACTS leading to this appeal, briefly, are as under. The writ Petitioner (Respondent herein) filed Civil Rule No 2757 of 1992 against the Assam State Electricity Board ('Board', for short) for quashing the order dated 23.7.92 placing him under suspension and the departmental proceeding initiated against him. Learned Single Judge made an interlocutory order on 30.4.93 directing the Board to revoke the suspension order, The Board made an application for vacation of the said interlocutory order but the Learned Single Judge rejected the application on 25.5.93. Hence this appeal.

(2.) MR . B.N. Sarma, learned Counsel for the Respondent, has contended that the interlocutory order made on 30.4.93 has lapsed as the main writ petition has boon finally disposed of on 3.7.93 allowing the writ petition and, therefore, the appeal is not maintainable.

(3.) COMING to the case on hand, the appeal before us is against the exercise of discretion by learned single Judge. In such an appeal, the appellate Court will not interfere with the exercise of discretion of the Court of first instance and substitute its own discretion except where the discretion has been shown to have been exercised arbitrarily or capriciously or perversely or where the Court has ignored the settled principles of law, In appeal against the exercise of discretion is said to be an appeal or principle sec Wander Ltd v. Antox India Ltd. : 1990 Supp SCC 727. In the order dated 30.4.93, learned single Judge observed, inter alia, that there is no material to disclose that, if the writ Petitioner is taken back to the office he will tamper with the evidence, and that the Respondent has been under suspension for about a year. The Appellant filed Misc Case No. 265 of 1993 for vacation of the interim order. The learned single Judge after considering the submissions made by the parties rejected the prayer for vacation of the interim order. Even we would like to come to a different decision it would not be a ground for interference with the impugned order for we do not find that the learned single Judge has exercised his discretion arbitrarily, In that view of the matter, the appeal is dismissed.