•^-^^•^-^'^'•V.S'^"^^ 1<- ^--(^' IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITIQN (227) N0.2-.fe.2~.OF 2009 PETITIONERS (Defendants No. 1&2) 1>^^- ^.^a<a^.^ ^-1. Secretary, M. P. Board of Secondary Education Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal (M.P.) ^2. Secretary, C.G. Board of Secondary Education, Raipur (C.G.) ^ ^::- RESPONDENTS (Plaintiff) (Defendant No.3) VERSUS Rakesh Kumar Shukla S/o. Late D.S. Shukla, R/o. Qtr. No. 990/2, N.E. Colony, Bilaspur (C.G.) State of C.G. Through Collector, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ^-WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF /r>^ '^ COUNSTITUTION OF INDIA. THB ^5 .f^..^.S2S.—.^-... r- o> HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Sinale Bench : Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mlshra,J. Writ Petition (227) No.2832 of 2009 Petitioner (Defendants No.1 & 2) MP Board of Education and Respondents Piaintiff&defendant No.3 Secretary, Secondary another. Versus Rakesh Kumar Shukla and another Writ Petitjon under Article 227 of the Constjtytjon of India Present: Shri RS Patel, counsel for the petitioners. Shri Ravindra Agrawa!, counsel for respondent No.1 Ms Sangeeta Mishra, Panel lawyer for the State / respondent No.2. ORDER (8th February, 2010) The plaintiff / respondent No.1 filed a suit in the trial Court whichwas dismissed as not maintainable by an order ofthe trial Court passed on 14.10.2008. The plaintiff preferred a regular first appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which has been allowed by the impugned order dated 02.02.2009 (Annexure P/1). The First Appellate Court after framing a preliminary issue has remanded the matter to the trial Court for fresh adjudication. Such an order of remand is an appealable order under Order XLIII Rule 1 (u) of the Code of Civil Procedure. ^^ / In view of the existence of aiternative remedy of flling a '\ subbu Miscellaneous Appeal, the present writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable. 2) Shri RS Patel, learned counsel for the petitioners prays for permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file Miscellaneous Appeal under the relevant provisjons of the Code of Civil Procedure. 3) The writ petition is permitted to be wjthdrawn with the iiberty as aforesaid. 4) Shri RS Patel, learned counsel for the petitioners prays for return of the certifled copy of the impugned order fiied tn this writ petition. 5) The Registry is directed to return the certified copy of the impugned order to learned counsel for the petitioners after retaining a Xerox copy in the record. Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge