Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.

Impugning legality, validity and correctness of order passed by learned Single Judge declining to grant interim order/refusing to stay the effect and operation of order of termination dated 16.06.2016, this writ appeal has been preferred by the appellants/writ petitioners under Section 2(1) of the Chhattisgarh High Court (Appeal to Division Bench) Act, 2006 [hereinafter called as "the Act, 2006"].

2. The office has raised an objection that as per proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 2 of the Act, 2006, writ appeal against the interlocutory order is barred therefore the writ appeal is not maintainable and to adjudicate that office objection, the matter has been placed before us.

3. Mrs. Meena Shastri, learned counsel for the appellants, would submits that since the learned Single Judge has rejected the appellant's application for interim relief i.e. to stay the effect and operation of order of termination by impugned order, that vitally affects petitioner's right and even otherwise, the impugned order has a bearing on the final adjudication of the case, therefore the order impugned is not an interlocutory order and as such, appeal would lie under Section 2