Jagdish Bhalla, J. - (1.) Aggrieved by the order dated 7.3.2003 passed in Writ Petition No. 3111[SS] of 1991, the appellant has filed this Special Appeal. The order dated 7.3.2003 passed in the aforesaid writ petition by the learned Single Judge reads as under:- "Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri K.M.N.Chak appearing on behalf of the opposite party no.4 and the learned Standing Counsel The petitioner has alleged in the petition that due to his illness and thereafter due to the death of his father, he could not attend the School. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the termination order dated 19.7.1984 passed by the opposite parties 2 and 3 was not approved by the Basic Shiksha Adhikari by the order dated 23.8.1984. He further submits that the resignation letter dated 11.10.1984 was also withdrawn by the petitioner on 12.10.1984 and till date the resignation has also not been accepted by the opposite parties. In view of the aforesaid facts, the opposite parties are directed to allow the petitioner to work from 11.3.2003. The Basic Shiksha Adhikari shall ensure the compliance of the order."
(2.) The aforesaid order has been challenged by the appellant mainly on the ground that on account of this order the services of the appellant, who is a regularly selected permanent Clerk of the School and is working continuously since 1985, are in jeopardy and that the aforesaid order has the traits and trapping of finality and affects vital and valuable rights of the appellant. Appellant has also contended that the writ petition itself was liable to be dismissed on the ground of extraordinary delay and laches as the cause of action accrued to the respondent no.1 way back in the year 1984-85 but he has filed the writ petition in the year 1991.
(3.) Dr L.P.Misra appearing for the respondent no.1 apart from arguing on the merits has also raised the question regarding maintainability of the Special Appeal and on the strength of the decisions laid down by this Court in Lucknow University and another Vs. Ashwani Kumar; 1995(13) LCD 7,Society Madarsa Mazahir Uloom Mubarak Shah, Saharanpur vs. Muzaffar Hussain; (1994)1 UPLBEC 277, Udai Bhan Singh and another Vs. Deputy Director of Education; 1995(13) 239 and the Apex Court decision in Shah Babulal Khimji vs. Jayaben D. Kania and another; AIR 1981 SC 1786, has contended that the impugned order passed by learned Single Judge does not express any opinion on the merits of the contentions raised on behalf of the parties and as such it cannot be said that by the impugned order learned Single Judge has decided matters of moment or affected vital and valuable rights of the parties which work serious injustice to the party concerned.;