IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Crl. Misc. Application (C-482) No. 570 of 2010 Hari Krishan Thapliyal S/O Late Shri Chagat Dev Thapliyal R/O 1/242 Circuit house, Pauri Presently Principal of Janta Inter College, Jamnakhal, Pauri Garhwal District Pauri Garhwal ………….. Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand Through Director General Vigilance Dehradun …………Opposite party Shri B.P.Nautiyal, Advocate, present for the petitioner Shri B.S.Parihar, Brief Holder, present for the State. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C.), the petitioner has sought quashing of the order dated 29.05.2010 passed by learned Special/ Sessions Judge in Special Sessions Trial No. 93 of 2009, State vs. Hari Krishna Thapliyal, relating to offences punishable under section 7/13 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Clause (b) of Sub Section (3) of Section 19 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 reads as under:- ‘ no court shall stay the proceeding under this Act on the ground of any error, omission or irregularity in the sanction granted by the authority, unless it is satisfied that such error, omission or irregularity has resulted in a failure of justice’. Clause (c) of Sub Section (3) of Section 19 of aforesaid Act further provides as under:- ‘ no court shall stay the proceeding under this Act on any other ground and no court shall exercise the powers of revisions in relation to any interlocutory order passed in any inquiry, trial, appeal or other proceedings’. (3) Learned Sessions Judge vide impugned order dated 29.05.2010 has observed that there is no illegality in the sanction granted against the petitioners as the sanction was granted by Additional Director, Education, who was higher in authority to the District Education Officer, on recommendation of the Authorized Controller. The sanction has not been granted by any authority, who is lower in rank to the appointing authority. (4) Having considered submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and after going the aforesaid provision of law, this court is not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the trial court. Accordingly, the petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C is dismissed summarily. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt. 18.6.2010 N.P.