JUDGMENT : V.K. Bist, J. Appellant is the writ petitioner. The writ petition was filed seeking the following reliefs: (i) To issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 23.03.2015 passed by respondent no. 2, whereby the petitioner was suspended by the respondent no. 2 for 15 days from the college without adhering an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. (ii) To issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 17.08.2016 passed by the respondent no. 2 to the extent of disqualifying the petitioner for contesting the proposed Student Union Election of college. (iii) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to allow the Petitioner to participate and contest in the student union elections for the session 2016-2017 for V.S.K.C. Govt. Post Graduate, College, Dhakpathar, Vikas Nagar affiliated with Garhwal, University, Srinagar. 2. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that the matter was heard by the learned Single Judge on 24.08.2016, but his application for interim relief was not considered and only notice was issued. It is also contended that the certified copy of the order dated 24.08.2016 has not been issued to the appellant by the Registry till date and, therefore, application for exemption has been filed. It is further contended that since the election is scheduled to be held tomorrow, i.e. on 01.09.2016, this appeal has been filed along with an application seeking exemption from filing the certified copy of the order dated 24.08.2016. Considering the facts, we allow the Exemption Application. 3. Heard Mr. Rajat Mittal, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Paresh Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 1. 4. The contention of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant is that on 23.03.2015, respondent no. 2 passed an order suspending the appellant for 15 days from the college. It is contended that the said order was passed without giving an opportunity of hearing to the appellant. Again, an order was passed on 17.08.2016, by which the appellant has been debarred from contesting the election. 5. Mr. Paresh Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 1 submits that the appellant was suspended vide order dated 23.03.2015 for assaulting and abusing one of the Guest Faculties of the College and the appellant did not appear before the Committee constituted. 5. Mr. Paresh Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 1 submits that the appellant was suspended vide order dated 23.03.2015 for assaulting and abusing one of the Guest Faculties of the College and the appellant did not appear before the Committee constituted. Therefore, the impugned order dated 23.03.2015 was passed. 6. Mr. Rajat Mittal, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that on 17.03.2015, Mr. Sumit Panwar, Guest Faculty, who made the complaint against the appellant, himself gave a letter to respondent no. 2 stating therein that he has no complaint against the appellant and he may be permitted to withdraw the complaint. We think that this submission will not help the appellant, as the appellant already stands punished vide order dated 23.03.2015. 7. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that though the appellant’s nomination was accepted on 27.08.2016, the respondent college published the list of candidates for election, in which the name of the appellant was not shown. 8. We find that the order impugned is an interim order against which no special appeal lies as per the High Court Rules. Therefore, we are not inclined to entertain the appeal. Even, if we entertain the appeal, the appellant will not get anything, as the list, in which the name of the appellant was not shown, has not been challenged by him and tomorrow is the date fixed for election. 9. Accordingly, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. 10. However, the learned Single Judge will dispose of the writ petition untrammeled by any observation made by us in this judgment.