1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 194/08 (Dinkar Baijnath Jadhav vs. Nagpur Municipal Corporation) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. Shri D.M.Surjuse, Adv. for Petitioner Shri M.V.Samarth, Adv. for Respondent. CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR AND S.R.DONGAONKAR, JJ DATED : 25 th JUNE, 2008. Heard counsel for the appellant. 2. In our opinion, although the writ petition, which was filed, mentions Article 226 r/w 227 of the Constitution, however, on going through the grounds and in particular the submissions canvassed before the learned Single Judge, which have been addressed in the impugned judgment, we do not find that the jurisdiction or power of the learned Single Judge under Article 226 was required to be invoked. The grievance made by the parties could be conveniently answered in exercise of powers under Article 227 of the Constitution. 3. Reading the judgment of the learned Single Judge as a whole, in our opinion, it is passed in exercise of powers only under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, for which reason, 2 the letters patent appeal against such order is not maintainable. This position has been answered recently by us in L.P.A. No.195/2008, decided on 16th June, 2008. For the same reason, therefore, this appeal is dismissed as not maintainable. JUDGE JUDGE Rvjalit