been filed before the Presiding vacation Judge for the second half of the summer, and hence this court should not have taken the appeals on its file. This argument is impressive at the first blush, but fails to sustain the impression it made on a deeper consideration. Principally, any order is passed by the Court and it must be distinguished from the Judge, even though it is the Judge who pens the order for the Court. Suppose the appeal is filed during the second half of the vacation court before another Presiding Officer, and if that judge chooses to hear the matter and decides to remand it, which is one of the procedural possibilities, who will hear the matter on the original side after remand? Obviously, it has to be the same Judge. Given the fact that summer vacation spans for a bare 30 days, it may be an improbable situation, still there is a theoretical possibility that it may happen. Therefore, just as an appeal from an appealable order passed by a vacation court may not lie before the same Judge, an appeal also cannot lie before different judges of the same vacation court. Therefore, there is nothing wrong in the appellants approaching this court with these appeals. After all ubi jus ibi remedium, and the Court must invent ways and means to do justice and cannot plea helplessness citing the rule book, which is but a handmaid of justice, and refuse to hear him. Justice shall be truly enthroned when this Court expands its power to do justice wherever adherence to rule
