1 D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL(W)NO.73/2008 Vicky alias Kare Vs. Smt. Praveen Saini & Ors. DATE OF ORDER :: 31-01-2008 HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. NARAYAN ROY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.M. LODHA Mr. Rajendra Soni, for the appellant. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. This appeal virtually has been filed by the appellant against order dated 11.1.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court whereby and whereunder writ application filed by the respondent no.1, was disposed of and the order of suspension was revoked. However, liberty was given to the State authorities to proceed in the matter after receipt of the preliminary enquiry report and by giving notice. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant was complainant at whose instance, first information report was lodged against respondent no.1 and in departmental proceedings, he was put under suspension. This appeal, in our view, would not be maintainable at the behest of the complainant-appellant for the simple reason that after filing of complaint, appropriate actions were taken by the State authorities by lodging first information report and also by putting the delinquent under suspension. The appellant appears to be working as a catalyst between the delinquent and the State authorities. It is borne out from the materials on record that no adverse order whatsoever, has been passed against the appellant. 2 Rather, it appears that liberty was given to the State authorities to proceed in the matter afresh. At the same time, we notice that the prosecution is pending against respondent no.1 on basis of the complaint filed by the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant however, tried to impress upon the Court by saying that the appeal would be maintainable as he was made party in the writ application and he had filed the written statement. Next, it is contended that by virtue of his being a complainant, he has locus to file this appeal. The appeal filed on behalf of the appellant, in the given facts and circumstances of the case, would not be maintainable and it is the prime concern of the State authorities to proceed in the matter or not to proceed but, in no way, the appellant can interfere in the matter by filing this appeal. This appeal, in this view of the matter, is not maintainable. It is accordingly dismissed. [R.M.LODHA],J. [NARAYAN ROY],CJ. Praveen