1 2918.11-wp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2918 OF 2011 Mrs.Jayshree Sambhaji Somvanshi. ... Petitioner. V/s. The State of Maharashtra & ors. ... Respondents. N.V.Bandiwadekar for the petitioner. Ms.Aparna Vatkar, AGP for respondent Nos.1 and 2. CORAM : R.V.MORE, J. DATED : 11th April 2011. P.C. : Heard Mr.Bandiwadekar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Vatkar, learned A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 and 2. 2. Petitioner’s services as Special Teacher have been terminated by respondent No.3 by order dated 14th February 2011. The petitioner approached appellate authority, namely, Divisional Social Welfare Officer on 22nd February 2011. In the said appeal, the petitioner also applied for stay of the termination order. The appellate authority by its order dated 14th March 2011 rejected petitioner’s application for stay. Therefore, the present writ petition. 3. The petitioner’s services as Special Teacher have already been terminated. The legality or otherwise of the termination order will be decided by the appellate authority at the time of final hearing of the appeal. The stay to the termination order was rightly rejected by the appellate authority inasmuch as the same would have amounted setting aside the termination sanjay 2 2918.11-wp order at the interim stage. In the above facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order in writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. However, in the interest of justice and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, respondent No.2- the appellate authority is directed to decide the petitioner’s appeal as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of six weeks from the date of the receipt of the order. Mr.Bandiwadekar, learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, apprehends that the competent authority i.e. the Divisional Social Welfare Officer may grant approval to the teacher who may be appointed in the vacancy created by the petitioner’s termination. He, therefore, claims injunction restraining the said authority from granting approval. In my view, at this stage, the said prayer cannot be granted as the said prayer was not made before the appellate authority. The petitioner is always at liberty to apply to the appellate authority for injunction against the competent authority from granting approval to the post of teacher who may be appointed at the vacant post created by the petitioner’s termination. The said liberty is granted to the petitioner to this effect. In order to enable the petitioner to apply in this regard, the parties shall maintain status-quo for a period of two weeks from today. With the above observation petition stands disposed of accordingly. (R.V.MORE, J.)