DIPAK MISRA, J. :- On a preliminary objection advanced by the learned counsel for the respondents that the writ appeal preferred against the order dated 12-1-2007 passed by the learned single Judge in W. P. No. 17241/2006 is not maintainable being hit by the proviso to sub-section (1) to Section 2 of the M.P. Uchcha Nyaylaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005, (for brevity 'the Act') a Division Bench hearing the appeal noticed that there are two sets of decisions pertaining to maintainability of an appeal under the Act in respect of interlocutory orders : (i) one holding that the appeals are maintainable under certain circumstances and (ii) the other holding that no writ appeal would lie against any interlocutory order as the bar created by the proviso appended to Section 2 of the Act would come into play. Because of this situation the Division Bench has referred the following question for adjudication by a larger Bench:-

"Whether the proviso of Section 2(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyaylaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 absolutely bars an appeal to the Division Bench or such an order can be assailed in an appeal regard being had to the nature, te