Hon'ble VYAS, J.— In this special appeal, an application has been moved with a prayer that in view of the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.436/2009, Sukhdev vs. Prakash Chand and other three special appeals on 16.04.2010, no intra-court appeal shall lie from an order passed by the learned Single Judge while exercising powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, therefore, this special appeal deserves to be dismissed being not maintainable in view of the above judgment.

2. It is contended by learned counsel for the respondent-applicant that in this special appeal, judgment dated 31.08.2009 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5429/2005, Kartar Singh vs. Board of Revenue & Others, is challenged and said judgment has been passed by the learned Single Judge in exercise of power conferred by Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Further, it is contended that the learned Single Judge has examined the validity of the order passed by the Board of Revenue while exercising supervisory jurisdiction over the subordinate courts. Therefore, in view of judgment of the Division Bench dated 16.04.2010, this special appeal is not maintainable.

3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that judgment of the Division Bench of this Court dated 16.04.2010 is not applicable in this case because the question with regard to maintainability of the special appeal against the judgment of the learned Single Judge has already attained finality in view of the two Full Bench judgments of this Court in 2003 (2) WLC 235, State of Rajasthan vs. V.R.C. Mishra, and 2005 (2) WLC 305, Ramesh Chandra Tiwari & Others vs. Board of Revenue & Others, in which specific question was formulated and answered in the affirmative.

4. Further, it is argued that in the recent judgment dated 16.04.2010 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Sukhdev's case (supra), the Division Bench of this Court while following the recent judgment of the apex Court, reported in (2009) 10 SCC 584, Ashok K. Jha & Others vs. Garden Silk Mills Ltd. & Others has held that no intra-court appeal is maintainable against judgment passed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India rendered by the learned Single Judge of the High Court; and, while observing the above fact, it has been held that the Full Bench decision of this Court rendered in Ramesh Chandra Tiwari's case (supra) does not lay down the law correctly.

5. It is argued by learned counsel for the appellant that before the Division Bench, in the case of Sukhdev Singh, D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.844/2009 and 3 others, the question was with regard to maintainability of those special appeals arising out from the judgment of the learned Single Judge, in which, challenge was made against interlocutory orders and while exercising powers under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the learned Single Judge decided the matter. The said writ petition was preferred under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India because earlier before the amendment in the Code of Civil Procedure, orders of civil Courts could have been challenged under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure by way of revision application before the High Court. But, after amendment in the Code of Civil Procedure, the right of revision under Section 115, C.P.C. has been taken away and jurisdiction of the High Courts has been narrowed down in entertaining the revision petitions. Therefore, the orders passed by the subordinate Courts are now challenged in the writ jurisdiction of the High Court. Therefore, the learned Division Bench has examined the question whether special appeal is maintainable against the judgment of the learned Single Judge in which order of civil Court was challenged and while exercising its revisional or supervisory jurisdiction writ petition has been decided against which appeal is maintainable or not. Therefore, in view of the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document