1. 1. On the request of the learned counsel for the parties, this special appeal is taken for final disposal.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 30.5.2000 whereby the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition filed by the wife respondent and set aside the order of the family court granting permission of the appellant to engage a lawyer.

3. It is contended by Mr. Purohit, learned counsel for the appellant that learned Single Judge dealing with Section 13 of the Family Act, 1984 has not taken into consideration Rule 22 of the Rajasthan (High Court) Family Courts (Amendment) Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred as rules of 1994) which gives discretion to the Family Court to permit a party to be represented by lawyer. Rule 22 is extracted as follows :

"Permission for representation by a Lawyer-The Presiding Officer of a Family Court, in his discretion may permit a Lawyer/Advocate to appear in the court wherever he feels that it is necessary in the interest of Justice."

4. Reading of the rule clearly shows that the discretion is vested in the Presiding Officer to permit a party to appear in the court whenever he feels that it is necessary in the interest of