JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Dinesh Kumar Singh learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Ram Ratan Dev Vanshi learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent.

2. The present special appeal is preferred challenging the judgment and order dated 10th August, 2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ-A No. 30395 of 2001 (Chandra Prakash Singh Vs. District Inspector of Schools And others).

3. The said order dated 10th August, 2018 was passed in the absence of the counsel for the Appellant-Petitioner in the writ proceedings and the learned Single Judge after going through the pleadings and the relief sought has simply recorded a finding that the Appellant-Petitioner has not been able to make out a case so as to justify interference of this Court by granting relief. No finding, however, has been returned on the merits of the claim of the petitioner/appellant herein.

4. The primary challenge to the order dated 10th August, 2018 is to the effect that the order has been passed exparte and the conclusion drawn by the learned Single Judge is unsustainable in law. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Appellant-Petitioner that the Appellant was validly appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher in L.T. Grade in the institution in question and has been denied the payment of salary on account of illegal order passed by the respondent authority which was subject matter of challenge in the Writ Petition No. 30395 of 2001 against which the present special appeal has been preferred. The learned Single Judge has not adjudicated the claim of the petitioner.

5. The present special appeal is an intra-court appeal from a Single Bench of this Court to a Division Bench of this Court and the purpose of providing special appeal against an order of learned Single Judge is to provide another tier of screening by the Division Bench and the same would not mean that the learned Single Judge is subordinate to the Division Bench although the learned Single Judge under law of precedent and principle of finality attached to the orders of Appellate Court, is bound by the order passed by the Appellate Court. While considering the powers of a Division Bench while deciding intra-court appeal, the Hon’ble Apex Court in Roma Sonkar Vs. Madhya Pradesh State Public Service Commission and another, [2018 (17) SCC 106] has held that in the matter of intra-court appeal arising out of writ proceedings, the Division Bench needs to consider the appeal on merits by deciding the correctness of the judgment of the learned Single Judge instead of remitting the matter to the learned Single Judge. In this reference, paragraph no. 3 of the judgment of the Apex Court as aforesaid of the Apex Court is quoted hereinbelow :

“3. We have very serious reservations whether the Division Bench in an intra-court appeal could have remitted a writ petition in the matter of moulding the relief. It is the exercise of jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The learned Single Judge as well as the Division Bench exercised the same jurisdiction. Only to avoid inconvenience to the litigants, another tier of screening by the Division Bench is provided in terms of the power of the High Court but that does not mean that the Single Judge is subordinate to the Division Bench. Being a writ proceeding, the Division Bench was called upon, in the intracourt appeal, primarily and mostly to consider the correctness or otherwise of the view taken by the learned Single Judge. Hence, in our view, the Division Bench needs to consider the appeal(s) on merits by deciding on the correctness of the judgment of the learned Single Judge, instead of remitting the matter to the learned Single Judge.”

6. Learned counsel for the Appellant as well as learned Standing Counsel for the Respondents have consented to advance arguments on the merits of the dispute as the writ petition as well as the counter affidavit have been filed along with the memo of appeal and, according to