vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1007 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO.1007 OF 2008 WRIT PETITION NO.1007 OF 2008 Shri Motiram Hirji Gavit ... Petitioner V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.J.g. Reddy for Petitioner Mr.V.S. Masurkar, Govt. Pleader, for Respondent Nos.1 to 5 CORAM: J.N. PATEL & J.N. PATEL & J.N. PATEL & SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. MHATRE, JJ. MHATRE, JJ. DATED: FEBRUARY 14, 2008 FEBRUARY 14, 2008 FEBRUARY 14, 2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking that his application for interim relief made in Original Application No.35 of 2008 be decided expeditiously as otherwise the petitioner would lose his job. It is submitted that the impugned order dated 10.1.2008 clearly states that the services of the petitioner would stand terminated for non-compliance of the conditions on which he was absorbed in employment as per the policy of the State relating to the regularising the services of the muster assistants. Our attention is drawn to an interim order passed in a similar case in which the petitioners whose applications were pending before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, had approached this Court as no interim relief was granted i.e. Jagdish Kashinath Kotkar v/s. State of : 2 : Maharashtra & Ors. (Writ Petition No.422 of 2008) (Writ Petition No.422 of 2008) (Writ Petition No.422 of 2008) and this Court by order dated 23.1.2008 has disposed of the petition by protecting the services of the petitioners till the results of the typing examination are declared. The Learned Government Pleader submits that in case of the Petitioners in Writ Petition No.422 of 2008, the petitioners had appeared in the typing examination conducted by the State. Such is not the case with the petitioner in the present matter. 2. Well, we are not inclined to go into the merits of the matter but dispose of this petition in terms of prayer clause (a) with a request to the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal to decide the application for interim relief sought in O.A. No.35 of 2008 filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and preferably in two weeks. 3. Authenticated copy of the order be provided to the parties for communicating the same to the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal. 4. Petition is disposed of accordingly. (J.N. PATEL, J.) : 3 : (SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J.)