B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.

1. Following questions are placed before us as per orders of the Hon’ble the Chief Justice :

i) Whether the learned Division Bench in deciding L.P.A. No. 150/2010 on 1.10.2010 was bound to take into account and follow the view of the Supreme Court in M.M.T.C. Limited .vs. Commissioner of Commercial Tax and ors – (2009) 1 SCC 8, taken by a bench of three Judges of the Supreme Court instead of following the view of the Supreme Court in Shalini Shyam Shetty and another .vs. Rajendra Shankar Patil – 2010 (7) SCALE 428, decided by two Judges of that Court having regard to the rule of law and practice laid down by the Supreme Court in State of U.P. vs. Ram Chandra Trivedi – AIR 1976 SC 2547 ?

And

ii) Whether the learned Division Bench ought to have followed the law laid down by the Supreme Court in M.M.T.C. Limited and held that a L.P.A. is tenable against an order of Single Judge passed in a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India in a matter arising out of an order of inferior Court or Tribunals in a dispute between two private parties such as a landlord and tenant ?

2. History leading to this Reference.

Judgment in L.P.A. No