SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,J. - (1.) This writ petition has been remanded back to this court by the Division Bench vide order dated 10.5.2018 which reads as under: "It is submitted by learned counsel for both the parties that many argument were raised before the learned Single Juge but have not been dealt with and even all the arguments have not been referred thus a joint prayer has been made to remand the case back to the learned Single Judge by causing interference in the matter, which may be again considered in the light of the arguments made by the parties. As prayed, the order dated 7.11.2017 is set aside with the remand of the case to the Single Bench. With the aforesaid, appeal stands disposed of."
(2.) This Court is of the view that the matter which has attained finality by a judgment passed by Single Judge, ought not be remanded merely on the basis of a joint prayer made by counsel appearing before the Division Bench. In the case reported by Hon'ble Apex Court in Roma Sonkar Vs. Madhya Pradesh State Public Service Commission and anr.- 2018 (10) scale,222, wherein the Apex Court held as under: "3. We have very serious reservations whether the Division Bench in an intra court appeal could have remitted a writ petition in the matter of moulding the relief. It is the exercise of jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The learned Single Judge as well as the Division Bench exercised the same jurisdiction. Only to avoid inconvenience to the litigants, another tier of screening by the Division Bench is provided in terms of the power of the High Court but that does not mean that the Single Judge is subordinate to the Division Bench. Being a writ proceeding, the Division Bench was called upon, in the intra court appeal, primarily and mostly to consider the correctness or otherwise of the view taken by the learned Single Judge. Hence, in our view, the Division Bench needs to consider the appeal(s) on merits by deciding on the correctness of the judgment of the learned Single Judge, instead or remitting the matter to the learned Single Judge."
(3.) Be that as it may, as the earlier order dated 7.11.2017 has been set aside by the Division Bench, it has become necessary for this court to again decide this matter which has been pending since 1999 for adjudication.;