( 1 ) SAVE by constitutional amendment, powers of a single Judge of a High Court to act suo motu under Art. 227, in a pending matter, of which he is in seisin, cannot be taken away.

( 2 ) IS that a constitutionally valid and acceptable proposition ?

( 3 ) HAPPILY, the obvious importance of the constitutional issue lying in its sui generis character, has motivated Gwalior's legal fraternity to serve a public cause by joining the debate. I heard petitioner's counsel Shri Lahoti who forcefully pressed the above thesis for acceptance, but also heard Senior Counsel Shri J. P. Gupta who volunteered to assist the Court as amicus curiae. Besides, I also heard Shri S. K. Dubey, President, High Court Bar Association, Gwalior and indeed, the State Counsel Shri Sinha at good length, because he forcefully voiced his strong opposition to the thess propounded, albeit placing implicit reliance on the Rules framed by this Court under Art. 225 of the Constitution.

( 4 ) UNDOUBTEDLY inspiration to propound the thesis is drawn mainly from a recent decision of the Apex Court in Umaji v. Radhikabai, AIR 1986 SC 1272. It may not be inappropriate to add further that this Court in Anwar v. Wa