Misra, J. --1. (For himself and on behalf ofHon'ble the Chief Justice). Perceiving two conflicting views, one expressed in Smt. Shiva Dubey (Jheera) v. Sumit Ranjan Dubey (Jheera) [WA No.3 10/06], Lakhan Lal Sonkar v. Gun Carriage Factory [2007(1) MPHT 335], and State of M.P. v. M.S. Wakankar [2007(1) JLJ 364] and the other in M/s. Ramanand Co. v. State of M.P. and another [WA 342/06] [2007(3) JLJ 220], pertaining to the maintainability of writ appeal under the provision of the M.P. Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 (for brevity "the Act") the Division Bench referred the matter to the larger Bench to put the controversy to rest and further to have the certitude in the field on certain parameters. Be it placed on record that the cavil relates to the bar provided under the proviso to sub-section (1+) to section 2 of the Act as regards the entertainability and acceptability of an appeal from an order passed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. In this factual backdrop the matter has been placed before us.

2. At the outset it is condign to mention that there is no necessity for advertence to the facts since the only question that has spiralled