THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.P.No.25513 of 2009 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Vilas V. Afzulpurkar) Heard both sides. This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal in O.A.No.11916 of 2009, dated 13-11-2009, where the Tribunal admitted the O.A. but declined to pass an interim order of staying the impugned reversion on the ground that no prima facie case is made out and it is not desirable to pass any interim order. It is the case of the petitioner that he was promoted as Executive Officer Grade-II vide proceedings, dated 25-07-2008, which was later modified by further proceedings, dated 01-09-2008. The petitioner states that he has been working as Executive Officer Grade-II since 26-07-2008. However, at the instance of another employee one Mr.Bh.V.R.Murthy, the promotion of the petitioner as Executive Officer Grade-II was alleged to be incorrect and was being enquired into and for that purpose a show-cause notice, dated 26-09-2009, was issued to him to show-cause as to why his promotion as Executive Officer Grade-II should not be annulled. It is the specific case of the petitioner that he has submitted his explanation to the said show-cause notice, a copy of which is appended to this writ petition, and the said explanation, dated 23-10-2009, was sent by registered post with acknowledge due and service on 27-10-2009 is also produced. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he had submitted such explanation well in time, the impugned order, dated 07-11-2009, was issued by the Commissioner of Endowments, whereunder the promotion granted to him is being withdrawn and questioning the same, he had approached the Tribunal by the aforesaid O.A. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is continuing in the said promotional post since 26-07-2008 and the impugned order is passed by specifically stating that in the absence of any explanation having been received from the petitioner, it is presumed that he has no defence to submit. It is, therefore, evident that the impugned proceedings are issued merely on the basis of there being no explanation from the petitioner whereas long before passing the said impugned order, the petitioner’s explanation, dated 23-10-2009 was duly received by the respondent as is evident from the acknowledgment produced. The said impugned order, therefore, prima facie appears to be unsustainable and in such an event, we are of the view that the Tribunal ought to have favourably considered the grant of interim relief to save the petitioner from an eminent reversion on the basis of the said impugned order. In the facts and circumstances of the case, therefore, we are satisfied that the interest of justice would met if the status-quo existing as on today is maintained pending disposal of the O.A. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing both the parties to maintain status-quo obtaining as on today pending disposal of the O.A. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J ________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J Date: 23-12-2009 Prv