1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10718 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 6127 OF 2007 Pachora Taluka Sahakari Shikshan Sanstha .. APPLICANT VERSUS Bhgwat s/o Ramdas Patil & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. S.S. Deshmukh, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. S.P. Brahme, Advocate for respondent no. 1. Mr. P.P. More, AGP for respondent no. 3. ===== CORAM : R. M. BORDE, J. DATE : 12 th October, 2009 PER COURT : 1 Application is presented by the applicant seeking clarification in respect of interim order passed by this court on 7-8-2008. 2 While directing issuance of rule this court directed the petitioner / management to deposit the financial benefits accruable to respondent no. 1 for the post of Office Superintendent from 1 st March 2005, in this court. School tribunal while allowing the appeal presented by respondent no. 1 2 herein held that the promotion order dt. 31-5-2000 promoting respondent no. 3 to the post of office superintendent is illegal and void. Management is directed to promote respondent no. 1 herein and also he is held entitled to the benefits of seniority with effect from 1-6-2000. It is stated that respondent no. 1 has attained the age superannuation as such benefits of seniority are expected to be extended to him. 3 Applicant has contended that as the order passed by the school tribunal is not specifically stayed while passing the interim order, the respondent has initiated proceeding by taking recourse to section 13(1) of the MEPS Act and the criminal prosecution is initiated against the applicant / management. Infact, by virtue of interim order passed by this court and by virtue of respondent no. 1’s attaining the age of superannuation, the effect to the order passed by the school tribunal directing promotion of respondent no. 1 is to be given by extending him the monetary benefits. By virtue of interim order in effect, the impugned order passed by the school tribunal stands stayed. The applicant may invite the attention of the court dealing with the criminal prosecution to this part of the order. Legality and validity of the order is to be determined at the time of final disposal of the petition. 3 4 In view of interim order passed by this court, the petitioner/management has deposited an amount of Rs.17,442/- in this court on 31-3-2009. Learned counsel for the respondents seeks leave to withdraw the amount. Considering the facts of the instant case and considering further fact that the amount deposited by the applicant / management is towards service benefits accruable to the respondent no. 1, respondent no. 1 can be permitted to withdraw the said amount on furnishing security. Respondent no.1 shall be permitted to withdraw amount of Rs.17,442/- deposited by the applicant in this court, alongwith interest, if any, by furnishing solvent security for the like amount. With these clarifications, civil application stands disposed of. This court has not expressed any opinion as regards merits of the contentions raised by the applicant in this application including the prayers noted in the application. ( R. M. BORDE, J.) dyb/office/ca10718.09.odt