MC 2423/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. S.K. Medhi, learned counsel for the applicant/responde nt No. 5. Also heard Mr. J. Roy, learned counsel for the writ petitioner. I have also heard Mr. J. Abedin, learned Standing Counsel, Education Department. By means of this application, the respondent No. 5 as the applic ant has prayed for modification/alteration/cancellation of the order dated 1.8.2 011 passed in Misc. Case No. 2215/2011 in WP(C) No. 3764/2011. By the said order , it has been provided that the respondent authority shall not appoint the respo ndent No. 5 i.e. the applicant as in-charge Principal of the particular school. It was also provided that it would be open for the Inspector of Schools, Kamrup District Circle (KDC) to take the charge of the Principal of the said school. The writ petition was filed on 25.7.2011 assailing the Annexure- C order dated 21.7.2011, by which, the Inspector of Schools, KDC allowed the res pondent No. 5/applicant to hold the charge of Principal of the school. After filing of the writ petition on 25.7.2011, the petitioner f iled Misc. Case No. 2215/2011 praying for a direction to appoint the petitioner as in-charge Principal of the school by declaring her to be the senior most teac her of the school. In the said application, it was stated that the incumbent Pri ncipal had retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.7.2 011 and that if the charge of the Principal is not given to her, she would suffe r irreparable loss and injury. In the application, nothing was disclosed about the order dated 22.7.2011 (Annexure-2); letter dated 30.7.2011 (Annexure-3); communication dated 30.7.2011 (Annexure-4) and communication dated 1.8.2011 (Annexure-5). By Annexure-2 order dated 22.7.2011, the incumbent Principal in- charge of the school had handed over the charge of the Principal to the responde nt No. 5/applicant on 22.7.2011 at 11.00 AM. By Annexure-3 letter dated 30.7.201 1, the Inspector of Schools, KDC had directed the incumbent Principal to hand ov er the charge to the respondent No. 5/applicant as he was retiring on 31.7.2011 on attaining the age of superannuation. Thereafter by Annexure-4 communication d ated 30.7.2011, the Director of Secondary Education, Assam was furnished with th e instruction regarding handing over of charge of the Principal to the applicant on 30.7.2011 itself. By Annexure-5 communication dated 1.8.2011, the incumbent Principal in-charge of the school reiterated the fact of handing over of charge to the applicant. All the aforesaid facts were not before the Court when the inter im order dated 1.8.2011 was passed. As noted above, in the Misc. Case only a app rehension was expressed that the charge of the Principal might be given to the a pplicant. It was on that basis, the interim order dated 1.8.2011 was passed rest raining the respondents from appointing the respondent No. 5/applicant as Princi pal in-charge. However, by the time, the interim order dated 1.8.2011 was passed , the applicant was already appointed as Principal in-charge and the charge of t he office was also handed over to him. In view of the above, I am inclined to vacate the interim order dated 1.8.2011 passed in Misc. Case No. 2215/2011 in WP(C) No. 3764/2011. Any of the observations made above, are only for the purpose of deciding this application and shall have no bearing in the right and contention raised in the writ petition by the parties. In view of this order, all consequential orders passed by the au thority, about which mention have been made in the counter affidavit filed by th e writ petitioner against this Misc. Case shall seize to have any effect. Misc. Case stands disposed of.