WPMS No.1323 of 2010 Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J. Mr. Aditya Singh, the learned counsel assisted by Mr. Neeraj Garg, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Piyush Garg, the learned counsel for the respondent no.1. Mr. Ravi Babulkar, the learned counsel for the respondent no.2. The name of respondent no.1 was recorded in the municipal registers since 1987. An objection under Section 147 of the U.P. Municipalities Act was filed by the petitioner, which was allowed and the assessment list was accordingly altered. The respondent no.1, being aggrieved by the said order, filed an appeal under Section 60 of the Municipalities Act, which was entertained. The respondent no.1 also filed an interim application in which the court opined that the same would be considered after hearing the municipality as well as the petitioner, but, at a later date, an interim injunction was passed staying the effect and operation of the order passed under Section 147. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the said order, has filed the present writ petition. In my opinion, these are interlocutory proceedings against which the present writ petition is not maintainable. Admittedly, the appeal is still pending consideration and only an interim order has been passed, consequently, this court is not inclined to interfere in the writ petition at this stage. The writ petition fails and is dismissed. However, considering the facts and circumstances that has been brought on record, I direct the court below to decide the appeal of respondent no.1 within six months from the date of the production of certified copy of this order. It is made clear that any observation made in the interim order is tentative in nature and cannot be relied upon by the respective parties. (Tarun Agarwala, J.) Dated 30.07.2010 LSR