Article 226 interference refused where the appellate order was speaking and no natural justice breach or legal infirmity was shown.

Interference under Article 226 was declined where the appellate order was a speaking order and no breach of natural justice or contravention of law was shown. The challenge was based on factual and evidence-driven objections, which the writ court could not reappreciate or treat as an appeal over the authority's findings. On that basis, constitutional writ intervention was held unwarranted and the writ petition was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was warranted against the appellate order on the ground of alleged legal infirmity, violation of natural justice, or factual error.

Analysis: The order under challenge was found to be a speaking order. No violation of natural justice was established, nor was any contravention of law shown. The objections raised were held to be factual and evidence-based, and the writ court was held not to sit in appeal over the findings of the authority or to re-appreciate evidence in exercise of constitutional writ jurisdiction.

Conclusion: Interference under Article 226 was declined and the writ petition was dismissed.

---