6. It has been submitted, on behalf of the appellants, before us, that at the relevant point of time i.e., in the year 2006, it was Block Development Officer, who was the appellate authority, and since the Appellate Tribunal came into existence in the year 2008, it did not have the jurisdiction to decide the legality or validity of the appointments of the appellants herein, which were made in the year 2006. Even if this submission is acceded to, the fact remains that the writ petition, namely, CWJC No.14233 of 2008, which had been filed by the appellants against the order of Block Development Officer, holding the appointments of appellant Nos. 2 to 5 herein as illegal, would remain binding on the appellants. No substantive purpose will, thus, be served even if this Court interferes with the findings reached, and the directions given, by the learned Appellate Tribunal. In other words, the order of Block Development Officer will still hold good even if the learned Tribunal’s order is, now, interfered with. In either case, these appellants do not stand to gain.
