JUDGMENT Pullan, J.
1. The appellant has taken the extraordinary course of making the District Judge of Benares respondent in this appeal. He has not made any other person respondent, although the proceedings in the District Judge's Court show cleaarly that the parties were Maheshwar Prasad Singh and Anr. v. Mahant Janardanachari. The appellant himself was not a party to proceedings, but he may be a person interested in the proceedings as it appears that in the course of the proceedings at an earlier stage he was appointed "mukhiya dharam Khata" of this trust property in place of Janardanachari. Clearly if there is any appeal against the order of the District Judge the proper respondents are the persons who started the proceedings, namely, Maheshwar Prasad Singh and another. In no case can the District Judge be a party. It is contrary to law and also to the public policy to call upon the District Judge as respondent to support his own judgment. In my opinion this so-called appeal as presented must be treated as a miscellaneous application and cannot be entertained. It is accordingly rejected.