( 1 ) APPEAL on hand, stems from the judgment and order dated May 14, 1999 passed by the learned single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the petitioner the challenge in which was focussed on the order dated october 26, 1998 passed by the Labour commissioner, U. P. Kanpur in exercise of the power conferred by the proviso to Rule 25 (2) (v) (a) of the U. P. Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Rules, 1975.

( 2 ) AT the very threshold, Sri Ram Niwas singh, learned counsel appearing for the second respondent made a preliminary submission stating that the appeal under chapter VIII, Rule 5 of the Rules of Court was not maintainable. The quintessence of his submission is that the Labour Commissioner while exercising the power under Proviso to rule 25 (2) (v) acts as a Tribunal and therefore, the judgment and order of the learned single Judge made in the writ petition wherein the order of the Labour commissioner (Tribunal) was under challenge, would not be appealable. Sri Tarun Agarwal, learned counsel appearing for the appellant repudiated the submission made by Sri Ram niwas Singh and urged in opposition that the labour Commissioner could not be equated w