Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


C/m, Sanatan Dharm Inter College & Another v. Pramod Kumar Pandey�& & Others - SPECIAL APPEAL No. 207 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 545 (25 February 2005)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court No. 32

Special Appeal No. 207 of 2005

Committee of Management, Sanatan Dharama Inter

College,Hasanpur, District Mainpuri  & others               ..........Appellants.


Sri Pramod Kumar Pandey and others                          ........Respondents.


Hon'ble S.Rafat Alam J.

Hon'ble Vikram Nath J.

We have heard Sri Yogesh Kumar Saxena learned counsel for the appellant and Sri P.K.Jain learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-respondent no.1.

It appears that by the order impugned in this appeal, learned single Judge has granted interim order after having satisfied that a prima-facie case for grant of interim order is made out. It further appears that at the time of passing of interim order, learned counsel for the respondent no.4 who is appellant no.2 in this petition was also heard. Three weeks time was allowed to file counter affidavit. It further appears that the interim order was directed to remain operative till the next date of listing.

It is strange that the appellant instead of filing counter affidavit in that proceeding has preferred this appeal. Special Appeal under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of Rules of the Court lies against the judgment of one Judge and not against an interim order when it does not amount to deciding the controversy finally. The learned single Judge in the order which is impugned in this appeal after recording the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner by interim order stayed the operation of the order of Joint Director Education, Agra dated 17.10.2003 till the next date of listing, which cannot be held to be a judgment and as such this appeal is not maintainable under the rules of the Court.

We therefore, dismiss the appeal as it is not maintainable. However in the facts of the case it is observed that it will be open to the appellant to move stay vacation application along with counter affidavit at an early date and we have no doubt that upon such application being made, the same shall be disposed of expeditiously or the writ petition itself may be decided on merits at an early date.

With these observations, this appeal stands dismissed.




Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.