HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 808 of 2025 Court No. - 21 HON'BLE MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, J. HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J. 1. The present intra-court appeal is directed against an order dated 31.7.2025 passed by Single Judge Bench in Writ Petition No. 10826 of 2025. The said writ petition has been filed by respondent no. 1 (referred to as 'the writ petitioner'), challenging the order dated 8.5.2025, passed by appellant no. 2 in compliance of order dated 18.3.2025, in a previous writ petition of the writ petitioner, bearing number 734 of 2025. 2. One of the issues before the writ court was whether the certificate possessed by the petitioner in relation to knowledge of computer granted by U.P. Development Systems Corporation Limited, was valid for the purposes of appointment on Class III post. The learned Single Judge while setting aside the order dated 28.12.2024 by which the appointment of the writ petitioner on Class III post was cancelled, issued the following directions: - "12. In view of above, while setting aside impugned order dated 28.12.2024 this writ petition is disposed of with observation that concerned respondent may scrutinize petitioner's qualification so far as CCC Certificate and typing speed is concerned and for that six weeks period is granted from today. It is also directed that for a period of six weeks from today, petitioner may not join her services as Junior Clerk, subject to above referred verification." 3. Thereafter, appellant no. 2 by order dated 8.5.2025 rejected the representation holding that the certificate possessed by the writ petitioner cannot be treated to be equivalent to the CCC Certificate issued by DOEACC Society /NIELIT, which alone are recognized. It has also been held that even alternate qualification of having passed High School or Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Yatindra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Neeraj Shukla The Basic Education Board, And 2 Others .....Appellant(s) Smt. Sudha Tomar And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) Intermediate with Computer Science as one subject, is also not possessed by the writ petitioner. Accordingly, relying on Government Order dated 3.5.2016, the representation has been rejected and which has the effect of cancelling the appointment granted to the writ petitioner. 4. In the writ petition from which the instant appeal arises, the learned Single Judge by order dated 31.7.2025 has stayed the effect and operation of the order impugned in the writ petition dated 8.5.2025 and has further directed that the writ petitioner would be permitted to discharge her duties and shall be paid salary on Class III post. 5. Sri Yatindra, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that the impugned order is an order which grants final relief to the writ petitioner without deciding the fundamental issue as to whether the certificate possessed by the writ petitioner granted by U.P. Development Systems Corporation Limited would be equivalent to CCC Certificate, stipulated under the Rules and Government Orders. He submits that by Government Order dated 3.5.2016, various other certificates/qualifications which could be treated to be equivalent to certificate granted by DOEACC Society, has been specified by the Government and therein the certificate issued by U.P. Development Systems Corporation Limited, possessed by the writ petitioner, has not been recognized. 6. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner tried to show that the certificate possessed by the writ petitioner should be treated as equivalent to CCC Certificate issued by DOEACC Society. 7. The said issue is still to be decided in the writ petition and therefore, we refrain from expressing any opinion in relation thereto in the present appeal. 8. We find considerable force in the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that the impugned order, though an interim order, has the effect of granting final relief. We feel that without deciding the fundamental issue as to whether the writ petitioner possessed the minimum qualification, permitting the writ petitioner to work and draw salary, would create complication at the stage of deciding the writ petition on merits. SPLA No. 808 of 2025 2 9. Consequently, the impugned order dated 8.5.2025 is hereby set aside. 10. As prayed by learned counsel for the writ petitioner, we leave it open to him to pray for expeditious disposal of the writ petition before learned Single Judge. 11. Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed of. September 11, 2025 Jaideep/- SPLA No. 808 of 2025 3 (Arun Kumar,J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- JAIDEEP BANERJEE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad