1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8225 OF 2008 Ratnakar Ramchandra Sarvankar. ...Petitioner. Vs. Korle Dhalavli Vikas Mandal & Ors. ...Respondents. .... Mr. M.S. Topkar for the Petitioner. Mr. A.S. Khandeparkar for Respondent Nos.1 and 4. Mr. A.I. Petel, AGP for Respondent No.3 ..... CORAM : DR. D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J. December 19, 2008. P.C. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Counsel appearing on behalf of the Fourth Respondent (the Appellant before the School Tribunal) are the contesting parties inasmuch as the School Tribunal has granted interim relief to the Fourth Respondent by the impugned order dated 29th September 2008. The Learned AGP appears for the Third Respondent. Learned Counsel are agreed that inasmuch as the petition is directed against an interlocutory order, it would not be necessary for this Court to go into the correctness of the observations contained in the impugned order 2 which are confined to the disposal of the question of interim relief. It has, however, been agreed that since the management has made an interim arrangement in accordance with the directions of the Education Officer by designating the Seventh Respondent as the authority to sign the Pay Bills as an incharge Headmaster, that arrangement may continue until the appeal is heard and finally disposed of. In the circumstances, in view of the aforesaid statement and without this Court being required to go into the correctness of the observations contained in the impugned order, the impugned order of the School Tribunal is by consent set aside. However, it is clarified that the School Tribunal shall decide the appeal on merits without considering either the impugned order or the order of this Court as amounting to an expression of any opinion on the merits of the rival contentions. Parties shall appear before the School Tribunal for receiving directions on 12th January 2009. The Tribunal is requested to expeditiously dispose of the appeal and to endeavour to do so by 31st March 2009. Since the contest in the present proceedings is as between 3 the Petitioner and the Fourth Respondent, it has not been necessary to issue notice to other parties though Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner has stated that service of the paper book has been effected on all other parties. Should any other parties including the management seek modification of this order, they shall be at liberty to move the Court. The petition shall accordingly stand disposed of. ......