D. B. BHOSALE, J.

( 1 ) THE principal question, which arises for determination in this Appeal under Clause 15 of the letters Patent, is whether the Judgment prepared by a member of the Division Bench and thereafter signed by the other member can be pronounced by him even after the other member of the Bench ceases to be a Judge of this court. The question as to maintainability of the letters Patent Appeal (for short, "lpa") was also raised, in the course of arguments, contending that by no stretch of imagination the order, impugned in the appeal, can be treated as a Judgment within the meaning of clause 15 of the Letters Patent.

( 2 ) THE factual matrix, giving rise to the aforesaid questions, briefly stated, is as follows. A Division bench of the learned Chief Justice Mr Dalveer Bhandari (as His Lordship then was) and Mr S. J. Vazifdar,j. heard public Interest Litigation No. 10 of 2005 and upon conclusion of the arguments, reserved the judgment. The judgment was thereafter prepared by S. J. Vazifdar,j. and he forwarded a draft thereof to the learned Chief justice. The learned Chief Justice signed the judgment in New Delhi on 27. 10. 2005. On 28. 10. 2005, the learned chief