1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 280 of 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 166 of 2007 The State of Maharashtra & ors. ....Applicants Vs. Shivaji University Shikshak Lokshahi Aghadi & ors. ....Respondents Mr. S.R.Nargolkar, GP for the applicants. Mr. M.S.Topkar, advocate for respondents/original petitioners. CORAM:­ A.M.KHANWILKAR AND R.M.SAVANT, JJ DATED:­ April 06, 2010 P.C. Heard Counsel for the parties. 2. In so far as relief in terms of prayer clause 7(a) is concerned, it is not in dispute that the order dated 23rd April, 2008 which confirmed the earlier ad­ interim order dated 16th March, 2007 was passed after hearing both sides. There is no changed situation which would permit the Applicants to ask for vacating the said order. If the Applicants had any grievance about the said order, they ought to have take the matter in appeal. Suffice it to observe that the question of vacating the interim relief granted by this Court after hearing both sides does not arise. 2 3. In so far as prayer in terms of prayer clause 7(b) for expediting the hearing of the Writ Petition is concerned, we are in agreement with the objection taken on behalf of the Writ­Petitioners that the Applicant­State of Maharashtra is infact in default in not forwarding the proposal to UGC and Union of India in terms of the observations in Paragraph 1 & 2 of the order dated 16th March, 2007 till date. In any case, we see no propriety in expediting the hearing of this Petition as this Court is presently taking up matters pertaining to year 1996 for final hearing. It will be open to the Applicant to renew the prayer for expediting hearing of this Petition after sometime. 4. Application rejected on the above terms. (R.M. SAVANT, J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)