Court No. - 34
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 670 of 2019 Appellant :- Committee Of Management,Rambeti Vidya Samiti And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Munesh Kumar Upadhyay,Rahul Srivastava,Sudhanshu Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Siddharth Khare Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Re : Civil Misc. Delay Condonation Application No.4 of 2019
1. Learned Standing Counsel as well as Sri Pratik Chandra, Advocate holding brief of Sri Siddharth Khare, learned counsel who has accepted notice on behalf of respondent 4, stated at the Bar that they do not propose to file any written objection to the delay condonation application but the Court may hear applicants-appellants and if satisfied with the cause of delay, may pass appropriate order.
2. Heard Sri Rahul Srivastava, learned counsel for applicants-appellants. Reason for causing delay in filing appeal has been explained satisfactorily. Delay in filing appeal is condoned.
3. The application is allowed. Let appeal be registered with regular number and the old number shall also continued to be shown in bracket for finding out details of case, whenever required by parties with reference to either of the two numbers.
Order Date :- 30.7.2019 Manish Himwan
Court No. - 34
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 670 of 2019 Appellant :- Committee Of Management,Rambeti Vidya Samiti And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Munesh Kumar Upadhyay,Rahul Srivastava,Sudhanshu Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupendra Kumar Yadav,Siddharth Khare Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Sri Rahul Srivastava, learned counsel for appellants, learned Standing Counsel for State-respondents and Sri Pratik Chandra, Advocate holding brief of Sri Siddharth Khare, learned counsel for respondent 4.
2. This intra Court appeal under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as "Rules, 1952) has arisen from judgment dated 02.05.2019 passed by learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.13292 of 2019, whereby learned Single Judge has only granted time to parties to the extent writ petition has been connected with Writ C No.35467 of 2018 and directed to be listed after six weeks.
3. Learned counsel for appellants contended that impugned order has been passed by learned Single Judge without noticing the instructions received by learned Standing Counsel and therefore, the same is illegal and arbitrary.
4. A special appeal, under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of Rules, 1952, lies against a judgment and not against the kind of order, which has been challenged in this appeal.
5. In view thereof, we find that this is a thoroughly misconceived appeal and not maintainable at all.
6. Dismissed accordingly.
Order Date :- 30.7.2019
Manish Himwan