(1.) A petition was made by one Jang Bahadur against the Principal of Mohindra College, Patiala under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and Section 60 of Ordinance No. X [10] of 2005 for issue of a writ of mandamus. The petition was dismissed by my order dated 15 -9 -1950. The present petition is under Article 132 of the Constitution for the grant of a certificate that the case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution.
(2.) THE Advocate General who appears for the Respondent opposes the application. His contention is that no question can be regarded as substantial unless there is difference of opinion about it and since the Petitioner's counsel has not been able to produce a single authority supporting his view that the action taken by the Respondent against the Petitioner violates the fundamental right of expression of opinion no certificate can be granted. Neither counsel could cite any authority under the Constitution but they are both agreed that the term must be interpreted in the same manner us it was done under Section 110, Code of Civil Procedure, Clause (3) of which lays down that when a decree or final order from which an appeal is sought to be preferred to His Majesty in Council affirms the decision of the Court immediately below the Court passing such decree or final order no appeal to His Majesty in Council is competent unless it involved some substantial question of law. It has been held that the term does not mean a question of general importance but a substantial question of law as between the parties to the case and that a question of law in order to be a substantial question must be a question in respect of which there may be a difference of opinion. Reference in this connection may be made to Gokal Chand v. Sanwal Dass 5 Lah. 260 :, A.I.R. 924 Lah. 473 and Feroze Din v. Nawab Khan 9 Lah. 581 :, A.I.R. 1929 Lah. 55.
(3.) THE petition is accordingly dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.