-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE JURISDICTION LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.210 OF 2006 IN WRIT PETITION NO.4998 OF 2006 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.286 OF 2006 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.210 OF 2006 Smt.Yashodhara H.Bolar ..Appellant Vs. Voltas Ltd. ..Respondent Mr.R.D.Bhat Advocate for applicant Mr.C.U.Singh Advocate for respondent CORAM: SMT.RANJANA DESAI & CORAM: SMT.RANJANA DESAI & CORAM: SMT.RANJANA DESAI & SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. DATE : OCTOBER 16, 2006 DATE : OCTOBER 16, 2006 DATE : OCTOBER 16, 2006 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Writ petition is already admitted. In this Letters Patent Appeal, only an interim order is under challenge. We see no reason to interfere with the interim order as there is no infirmity in it. The learned counsel for the appellant states that the appellant is not provided any work. The learned counsel for the respondent disputes this aspect. It is not possible for us at this stage, to state -2- whether the appellant is provided work or not. All these aspects could only be decided at the final hearing of the writ petition. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant states that appellant is being forced to undergo computer training and this amounts to change in service conditions. Mr.C.U.Singh states that offer to give training to the appellant was made in view of the observation made by the learned Single Judge in paragraph 5 of the impugned order and whether to accept training or not, is entirely left to the appellant. 3. In the circumstances of the case, we expedite the hearing of the writ petition and dismiss the Letters Patent Appeal. 4. In view of the above, the civil application is also disposed of. [ SMT.RANJANA DESAI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]