The High Court companystrued as if this Court has only waived the limitation for filing of Letters Patent Appeal and there was numberdirection to companysider the case on merits.
Underlined for emphasis A bare reading of the order shows that the direction was to companysider the LPA on merits and time was granted to prefer the LPA within three weeks.
The order of learned Single Judge was passed on 9.11.2005.
Since the impugned order is passed by a learned Single Judge.
Since we had entertained the Special Leave Petition against the learned Single Judges order it would be appropriate to grant three weeks time to the petitioner to prefer the LPA which if otherwise free from defect shall be entertained for being companysidered on merits.
The numbermal remedy is to file a Letters Patent Appeal.
The earlier order passed by this Court dated 22.8.2006 reads as follows Heard.
It was held that the order was passed in exercise of power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 in short the Constitution against which the Letters Patent Appeal is number maintainable.
As numbered above the prayer in the Writ Petition was to set aside the decision of the assessing officer.
The interim order passed by this Court shall companytinue for the aforesaid purpose.
The Special Leave Petition is disposed of accordingly.
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissing the writ appeal filed by the appellant on the ground that it was number maintainable.
Against the said order, special leave petition was filed which was disposed of by this Court by order dated 16.2.2006.
The appeal was filed under Section 2 1 of the M.P. Uchacha Nyayalay Khand Nyaypeth Ko Appeal Adhiniyam, 2005 hereinafter referred to as the Act .
