The Governor is required to give the Chief Minister an opportunity to prove his majority on the floor of the House before dismissing the government.

B. Dikshit, D.K. Seth, JJ.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State Mr. Ashok Mehta and Mr. S. K. Rai for the Union of India on 21.2.1998 we had retired and dictated the order, but before it could be pronounced, Mr. V. B. Singh, learned counsel appeared and submitted that he was representing Sri Jagdambika Pal and prayed that he may be heard before the order is pronounced. Accordingly, we had allowed him to intervene and heard him at length. The main thrust by Mr. V. B. Singh was that pronouncement of the order should be postponed till 11 a.m. of 22.2.1998 in order to enable him to produce the relevant records relating to the matter and no interim order should be passed. He was asked to furnish the materials on which he wanted to oppose the order. But he always continued to submit that he should be given an opportunity. Such opportunity can be effectively availed of by him only upon receipt of the record which he will be able to produce before the Court at 11 a.m. of 22.2.1998.

2. In the circumstances, each of us had agreed to adjourn the matter till 9 a.m. of 22.2.1998 with reference to the materials that might be produced by Mr. Singh. That is how the matter has been placed before us on the basis of the order that we had passed in respect of adjourning the matter till 9 a.m. of 22.2.1998.

3. In view of the situation, with the permission of Hon'ble the Chief Justice. Court room was opened on our proposal to take up the hearing in open Court. The matter was taken up at 10 a.m. on 22.2.1998. Mr. V. B. Singh, who had submitted that he was representing Sri Jagdambika Pal, submitted that he was representing the Government of U. P, as a special counsel assisted by Mr. Ashok Mehta, chief standing counsel. Mr. S. P. Gupta, senior counsel assisted by Mr. Vineet Saran represented Sri Jagdambika Pal. We have heard Sri Yatindra Singh, counsel for the petitioner, Mr. S. P. Gupta, senior counsel and Sri V. B. Singh at length. The hearing continued till about 5.45 p.m. Mr. Yatindra Singh had made his brief submissions and Mr. V. B. Singh had produced the records and made his elaborate submissions. Mr. S. P. Gupta continued to argue for about five hours after Mr. V. B. Singh and Mr. Yatindra Singh had concluded their submissions. Mr. Gupta insisted that he may be allowed to continue his arguments so long he does not feel that he has been able to give his best. Since he could not conclude his submissions, the matter was adjourned and taken up today at 10 a.m. for continuing the hearing. Mr. Gupta had concluded his submissions, whereafter Mr. V. B. Singh had further submitted and produced some more documents. Mr. Yatindra Singh had also concluded his reply. Thus, hearing stood concluded and orders were reserved. We proposed to pronounce the order in open Court at 3 p.m. today. Accordingly, is was so pronounced at 3.30 p.m. today.

4. A preliminary objection was taken by Mr. S. P. Gupta that in view of Rule 3. Chapter VIII of the Allahabad High Court Rules, there having been a difference of opinion between two Members of the Bench, the matter has to be referred to Full Bench even in respect of interlocutory order and had elaborated his submissions on the said point with reference to the relevant rules.

5. The fact remains that the difference of opinion cannot be said to have come into being when the order was not pronounced and at the behest of Mr. V. B. Singh representing Sri Jagdambika Pal, the matter was adjourned till morning 9 O'clock of 22.2.1998 in order to enable him to produce the records. Then again, one of us (Hon'ble B. Dikshit, J.) did not express any opinion as to whether the interim order should be granted or not and had expressed that one opportunity should be given to the respondents. After having got pronouncement of the order postponed on behalf of Sri Jagdambika Pal through Mr. V. B.