Judgment :- THE CHIEF JUSTICE: 1. This appeal is purported to have been taken under S. 30(1) of the Tamil Nadu Minor Inams (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1963, from an order refusing to grant stay by the Tribunal pending disposal of an appeal before it taken under S.(3) of the same Act. We shall extract S. 11(3) and S. 30(1) of the Act: “11(3) Against a decision of the Assistant Settlement Officer under Sub.-Sec,(2) the Government may, within one year from the date of the decision and any person aggrieved by such decision may within - three months of the said date, appeal to the tribunal: Provided that the Tribunal may, in its discretion allow further time not exceeding two months for the filing of any such appeal; Provided further that the Tribunal may, in its discretion, entertain an appeal by the Government at any time if it appears to the Tribunal that the decision of the Assistant Settlement Officer was vitiated by fraud or by mistake of fact”. “30(1) Against any decision of the Tribunal under Sub Sec.(3) of S. 11, the Government may, within six months from the date of the decision and any person aggrieved by any decision of the Tribunal under Sub-Sec (3) of S. 11, S. 26, S. 27, S. 28 or S. 29, may within three months from the date of the decision, appeal of the Special Appellate Tribunal consisting of two Judges of the High Court nominated from time to time by the Chief Justice in this behalf; Provided that the Special Appellate Tribunal may in its discretion, allow further time not exceeding three months for the filing of such appeal”. S. 11(3) in so many words does not say that the appeal taken under S. 11(3) should be decided. But it is axiomatic and consequential on the conferment of power on the Tribunal that the Tribunal should dispose of the appeal. A decision on the appeal is, therefore, clearly contemplated by S. 11(3). Any doubt on this matter is set at rest by the opening words of S. 30(1) which provides for an appeal to this court from the decision of the Tribunal under S. 11(3). Under S. 11(3) the Tribunal will be deciding the appeal before it. Any appeal under S. 30(1) can only be from an order of the Tribunal disposing of or deciding the appeal. Under S. 11(3) the Tribunal will be deciding the appeal before it. Any appeal under S. 30(1) can only be from an order of the Tribunal disposing of or deciding the appeal. This appeal is, therefore, not maintainable. 2. Counsel for the appellant pointed out that the power of deciding the appeal and the jurisdiction to deal with the appeal should necessarily imply the power to grant stay. This may be so. But, that does not affect the question as to the scope of S. 30(1) providing for an appeal to this Court. We have no doubt that the appeal under S. 30(1) to this court can only be from a decision in the appeal disposing of the appeal, taken under S. 11(3), and not from any interlocutory order passed in appeal. We accordingly dismiss this appeal.