HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 432 of 2025 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE RAJAN ROY, J. HON'BLE INDRAJEET SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard. 2. This Special Appeal is filed under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 challenging an interlocutory order dated 06.11.2025 passed in Writ A No.12726 of 2025; Nirmala Kumari vs. State of U.P. and ors. 3. The order dated 06.11.2025 reads as under :- "Let Counter Affidavit be filed by the opposite parties within three weeks. Rejoinder Affidavit, if any, may be filed within one week thereafter. List this matter after expiry of the aforesaid period. It is provided that the departmental authorities/State is at liberty to proceed in accordance with law and mere pendency of this writ petition will not create any bar in further proceeding of the opposite parties. " 4. The contention of the appellant counsel is that the aforesaid writ petition bearing Writ A No.12726 of 2025 was filed challenging an order dated 06.10.2025, by which the appellant/ petitioner was directed to hand over charge of Head Master of School to respondent no.5- Smt. Guru Raj Singh and a writ of Mandamus has also been sought for permitting the appellant/ petitioner to continue to discharge the duties of In-charge Head Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Sanjay Kumar Singh, Shivangi Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Saurabh Singh, Shivam Sharma Nirmala Kumari .....Appellant(s) The State Of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Basic Education And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) Master of School. The claim of the appellant/ petitioner is based on his seniority on the Feeder post. The contention of appellant's counsel is that learned Single Judge by making the observations in the last four lines of the impugned order dated 06.11.2025 has veritably rejected the interim relief application without considering the basis of the claim and the grounds for seeking interim relief. The order amounts to rejection of the interim relief application and on account of this grave prejudice has been caused to the appellant/ petitioner. 5. Shri Shivam Sharma, learned counsel for respondent nos.3 and 4/ Basic Shiksha Adhikari attempted to argue the matter on merits as to how the appellant/ petitioner was not entitled to relief, interim or final, before the writ court, so did Shri Anshuman Singh, Advocate holding brief of Shri Saurabh Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.5. 6. We fail to understand as to how the appellate court can be addressed on merits when the learned Single Judge, who has passed the impugned order dated 06.11.2025, has not considered the same and writ petition is still pending. 7. We find merit in the contention of the appellant's counsel that such an order should not have been passed. If the interim relief application was to be rejected, it should have been first of all considered by the learned Single judge, which has not been done. We, accordingly, set aside the impugned order dated 06.11.2025. We request the learned Single Judge to consider the interim relief application of the appellant/ petitioner on the next date fixed. 8. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed. 9. The writ petition shall now be listed before the writ court on December 17, 2025 as fresh. 10. Let a copy of this order be provided to the parties today on payment of usual charges, if possible, today. December 10, 2025 Arnima SPLA No. 432 of 2025 2 (Indrajeet Shukla,J.) (Rajan Roy,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARNIMA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench