R.M.Prasad and N.K.Sinha JJ.

1. The appellants have filed this appeal against the order dated 22-3-1996 passed in Cr. W.J.C No. 84 of 1996 by the learned single Judge of this Court dismissing the said writ petition.

2. The said writ petition was filed for quashing the entire proceeding of Case No. 844 M/94 initiated under Sec. 147, Cr.P.C. vide order dated 27-5- 1994, by the Sub-divisional Officer, Manjaul, Begusarai yicspondent No. 2).

3. The Stamp Reporter in the report dated 6-3-1997 has reported that no L.P.A. lies against an order passed by the learned single Judge in Cr.W.J.C. Hence, according to him this L.P.A. is not maintainable.

4. On the question of maintainability, we heard learned Counsel for the appellants, in detail, on 1-5.1997 and reserved the order.

5. learned Counsel for the appellants assailed the correctness of the aforementioned stamp report on the ground that clause 10 of the Letters Patent constituting this Court does not preclude this Court from entertaining appeal against an order passed by the learned single Judge of this Court in its criminal writ jurisdiction. According to him, under Rule 3 of Chapter XXI-C of the Patna High Court Rules (in shor