STATE OF J&K Vs. GH HASSAN HAJINI (DR)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ADMITTED . Heard finally.

(2.) THIS Letter Patent Appeal is directed against order of Single Judge dated 30 -05 -1997 staying the operation of Government Order No. 470 -HME of 1997 dated 30 -04 -1997 to the extent it appoints the petitioner as Officer on Special Duty (OSD) in the Health and Medical Education Department. During the course of hearing of this matter, Shri S.T. Hussain, learned Senior Counsel, contended that this Appeal is not maintainable as the impugned order is interlocutory in nature and that the petitioner has been transferred out of his cadre, which is not logically permissible and that the petitioner may be allowed to function in Medical College, Srinagar against the post he was holding before the impugned order was passed.

(3.) ON the first submission, reference was made to Asrumati Debi Versus Kumar Rupendra Deb Raikot and other (AIR 1953 Supreme Court 198). Careful reading of this judgment shows that if the order affects the merits of the controversy between the parties in the case at any stage of the proceedings, it amounts to Judgment within the meaning of Letters Patent Law and Appeal can be competently filed against the same. This position has been made amply clear by the Apex Court in later decision reported in AIR 1981 Supreme Court 1986; (Shah Babulal Khimji Versus Jayaben D. Kania and another) in which Asrumati Debiâ„¢s case (supra) has been considered. It has been held in this judgment that whenever a trial judge decides a controversy which affects valuable rights of one of the parties, it must be treated to be a Judgment within the meaning of Letters Patent. However, all interlocutory orders may not be regarded a Judgment, but those which decide matters of moment or affect vital and valuable rights of the parties and which work serious injustice to the party concerned, would be Judgments under Letters Patent.