Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a special appeal lay against a Single Judge's judgment under Article 226 of the Constitution where the writ petition challenged an interim order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in exercise of appellate power under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944.
Analysis: Chapter VIII, Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules excludes a special appeal from a judgment passed in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction and also from a judgment under Article 226 in respect of an order of a Government, officer or authority made in appellate or revisional jurisdiction under a Central Act. The impugned order, though interim in nature and relating to waiver of pre-deposit under the proviso to Section 35F of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, was passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) while exercising appellate authority. The pendency of the main appeal did not alter the appellate character of the order. The writ petition therefore fell within the exclusion in Rule 5.
Conclusion: The special appeal was not maintainable and was liable to be dismissed.
Final Conclusion: The judgment affirms that an order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the course of appellate proceedings remains an appellate order for the purpose of the special appeal bar under the High Court Rules.
Ratio Decidendi: An order passed by an appellate authority in the course of pending appeal, including an interim order on pre-deposit, retains its character as an appellate order and a special appeal against a writ judgment challenging such order is barred by the relevant rule.