- (1.) A learned Single Judge has granted an interim relief to the respondent petitioner, vide impugned order dated 22.1.2016 and aggrieved, the respondent appellant has approached this Court questioning the correctness thereof including the jurisdiction of the learned Single Judge to entertain the petition on behalf of the respondent petitioner who, according to the appellant, does not have any locus or cause of action to maintain the petition.
(2.) Sri Anupam Mehrotra has advanced his submissions on the merit of the claim to substantiate the stand of the appellant urging that the learned Single Judge was neither justified in entertaining the petition nor did there exist any prima facie case in favour of the respondent petitioner for grant of any interim relief.
(3.) A preliminary objection has been taken by Sri Sandeep Dixit who appears for the respondent petitioner, contending that the special appeal under Chapter VIII Rule 5 which is an intra-Court appeal, would not lie and for that, Sri Dixit has relied on the Division Bench Judgment in the case of Jai Prakash Agrawal Vs. Prescribed Authority (Sub-Divisional Magistrate), Sadar, District Deoria and others, 1999 1 UPLBEC 697. He has also invited the attention of the Court to the Division Bench Judgment dated 28.3.2016 in Special Appeal Defective No.162 of 2016: Committee of Management Madarsa Azimul Ulcom and another. Vs. Prescribed Authority/Up Zila Adhikari and 4 others. The third decision is dated 22.2.2016, in Special Appeal No.92 of 2015:Committee of Management Baba Mangal Das Shiksha Samiti and 3 others. Vs. Prescribed Authority and 12 others.;