
    Lucian B. HOLMES et al., Appellants, v. Ed STEGER et al., Appellees.
    No. A-8093.
    Supreme Court of Texas.
    Nov. 7, 1960.
    Billings & Donovan, Dallas, for appellants.
    Will Wilson, Atty. Gen., Houghton Brownlee, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Henry Wade, Dist. Atty., Dallas County, Dallas, Leon Jaworski, Houston, Edward Clark, John D. Cofer, Robert C. Sneed, Austin, B. Thomas McElroy, Dallas, of counsel, for appellees.
   PER CURIAM.

This is a direct appeal and our jurisdiction of this cause must rest upon Article 5, § 3b of the Texas Constitution Vernon’s Ann.St. and Article 1738a, Vernon’s Ann.Tex.Civil Stats. In order for this Court’s jurisdiction to attach, it is essential that the order of the trial court granting or denying an interlocutory or permanent injunction be based “on the groundfs] of the constitutionality or unconstitutionality of any statute of this state”, or on a holding that an administrative order of a state board or commission issued under a statute is valid or invalid.

It conclusively appears that the trial court did not base its decision dismissing this cause upon such grounds. This cause was dismissed by the trial court upon the holding that appellants were without the necessary justiciable interest to maintain, this suit.

It follows that any appeal from the trial court’s order should have gone to the Court of Civil Appeals under Article 1821, Vernon’s Ann.Tex.Stats. and that this Court is without jurisdiction of the appeal. Lipscomb v. Flaherty, 153 Tex. 151, 264 S.W.2d 691; Gardner v. Railroad Commission, Tex., 333 S.W.2d 585.

The attempted appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.  