JUDGMENT : 1. We do not propose to go into and decide the question whether the authorities vested with and exercising the power to grant sanction for prosecutions are amenable to the Court's process and the extent of the justiciability of the issue. One of the grievances aired in these proceedings is that the withholding of the sanction has been improper or not in accordance with law. We keep that question open in these proceedings. 2. However, on the merits, we notice that a learned counsel seeks to prosecute a Judge Order dated April 11, 1994 in S.L.P. (C) Nos. 5403 of 1994. of the High Court on the allegation that a party to a proceeding had been unjustly dealt with by the Judge. Sri Badridas Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners, does not dispute that the petitioner himself has no personal grievance. Petitioner is supposed to have brought this action in public interest. Since a learned counsel has permitted himself this extraordinary exercise, we do not want to use stronger language. Suffice it to say that these proceedings are totally misconceived. 3. The Special leave petition is dismissed.