IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.217 OF 2009 Harendra Singh .. Petitioner Vs. The Union of India and others .. Respondents Mr. Ajay Pal Singh for the petitioner. Mr. G. Hariharan with Mr. S.C. Pal i/by Dr. T.C. Kaushik for the respondents. CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. DATED : 10TH FEBRUARY, 2009 P.C. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. We do not think it appropriate to issue notice of this petition and keep this petition pending before this court. The petitioner on the basis of the facts stated in the petition had primarily prayed for the following reliefs: “(a) To issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ, order or direction to direct the Respondents to maintain status quo in matter of rank held by the petitioner on the day of filing this Writ Petition. (b) To issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ, order or direction to direct the Respondents to make ad-hoc payment towards the arrear of pay & allowances as per the rank held by the Petitioner pending decision in this Writ petition. (c) To issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ, order or direction to direct the Respondents to protect my seniority for the next promotion to which the Petitioner will falling due shortly in the case any delay caused by the Respondents. (d) To issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ, order or direction to direct the Respondents to reply the ROG put up by the Petitioner and the same is pending for decision of the competent authority.” 2. In the letter dated 31st May, 2008, the Commanding Officer (AOD), had dealt with part of the reliefs claimed and in the last paragraph, noticed that in view of the facts stated, it is requested that the case may be taken up with HQWNC/IHQ MOD(N( for decision with regard to the promotion of sailors from the 10+2 Artificer Entry Scheme. However, even vide letter dated 14th July, 2008, the general circular was issued in that regard but other reliefs claimed by the petitioner have not been specifically dealt with much less decided by proper reasons. 3. In these circumstances and to which the learned counsel for the respondents have no objection, we dispose of this petition with a direction to the competent authority to consider the averments made in the writ petition as well as in the earlier representation submitted to the respective authorities and take a final decision by passing a reasoned order within four weeks from today. The order that may be passed shall be communicated to the petitioner. We have no doubt that the various grounds stated in the writ petition would receive due consideration at the hands of the respondents. Petition stands disposed of. CHIEF JUSTICE DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.