Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:44489-DB Court No. - 1 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 319 of 2025 Appellant :- Indian Council Of Agriculture Research Thru. Its Director General New Delhi And Another Respondent :- Vinay Kumar And 37 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Ashutosh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Sunil Kumar Chaudhary,A.S.G.I.,C.S.C.,Prashant Kumar Singh Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Order on C.M. Application No. 1 of 2025 1. An application for condonation of delay supported with an affidavit has been filed along-with the appeal. 2. Reasons in detail have been spelt out in the affidavit filed in support of delay condonation application to which there is no objection. 3. In absence of any objection and the cause shown being sufficient, the application is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Order on Appeal. 4. Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the appellant is taken on record. 5. Heard Sri Vivek Raj Singh assisted by Sri Ashutosh Kumar Srivastava and Sri Devak Vardhan, counsel for the appellants, Sri S.C. Mishra, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Sunil Kumar Chaudhary, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 to 32, Sri Prashant Kumar Singh, counsel for respondent nos. 33 to 36. 6. At the very outset, a preliminary objection as to the maintainability of the present intra court appeal filed under chapter VIII, Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules has been raised on the ground that the appeal is directed against interlocutory order, therefore, the same is not maintainable as no issue has been decided by the Writ Court finally by an interim measure. 7. It is also urged that the same salary is protected by the Writ Court as was prescribed in their orders of appointment. 8. To the contrary, learned counsel for the appellants has argued that the MOU between the university and the appellants has been cancelled, therefore, the obligation for payment, if any, rests on the university and the appellants would not be under an obligation to comply with the direction issued by the Writ Court. 9. This stand can be well taken before the writ court as well as the Contempt Court and the proceedings shall only proceed on decision of such an objection raised before the respective courts. Leaving it open to the appellants to raise the objection before the courts concerned. We decline to entertain the present intra court appeal under Chapter-VIII, Rule-V of the Allahabad High Court Rules. 10. In the circumstances of the case, however, we request the Writ Court to proceed with the matter and decide the same expeditiously in accordance with the law. 11. Learned counsel for the respondents has stated that the pleadings before the Writ Court have already been exchanged, therefore, there does not seem to be any hurdle coming in the way of deciding the Writ proceedings finally, at the earliest. Hearing of the writ petition is expedited. 12. Accordingly, the instant appeal is disposed of. (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) (A.R. Masoodi,J.) Order Date :- 31.7.2025 Mayank Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench