IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 27 OF 2007 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 590 OF 2006 THE STATE OF GOA THROUGH ITS CHIEF ....Applicants SECRETARY AND 10 ORS. Versus GOA UNIVERSITY TEACHERS ....Respondents ASSOCIATION (GUTA) THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN MR. BUGUI D. DESSAI AND 12 ORS Mr. Rafiq Dada, Sr. Advocate with Mr. S. S. Kantak, Advocate General with Ms. Rakhi Chodankar, Addl. Govt. Advocate for the applicant/Org. respondents No.1, 7 and 8. Mr. A. N. S. Nadkarni and Mr. H. D. Naik, Advocates for the respondent No.1, Mr. S. S. Kantak, Advocate General with Ms. Rakhi Chodankar, Addl. Govt. Advocate for respondents No.2, 3, 5, 6 and 11. Mrs. A. Agni, Advocate for the respondent No.4. Mr. M. S. Sonak, Advocate for the respondent No.10. Coram:- S.K. SHAH & N. A. BRITTO, JJ. Date:- 26th February, 2007 P.C. Heard the Counsel on both sides. It is clarified that the ad interim relief which was granted in terms of clause(C) of the petition does not include the tender process which has been undertaken by the respondent No.1 for the purpose of Convention Centre. The respondent No.1 may continue with the tender process, but it would be solely at their own risks. No parties shall be entitled to claim equity on the basis of the completion of the tender process. The learned Counsel representing the respondent No.1 states that no work shall be undertaken pursuant to finalisation of the tender process. The writ petition shall be placed for final hearing. S.O. two weeks. S.K. SHAH, J. N. A. BRITTO, J. ssm.