G % 21.01.2009 38 to 43# Present: Mr. Naresh Kaushik with Ms. Anita K. Chaudhary and Ms. Aditi Gupta for the petitioner. / + WP fC) No. 393/2009 & CM Nos. 875-76/2009 WP (C) No. 394/2009 & CM Nos. 877-78/2009 WP fC) No. 395/2009 & CM Nos. 879-80/2009 WP fC) No. 396/2009 & CM Nos. 881-82/2009 WP fC) No. 397/2009 & CM Nos. 883-84/2009 WP fC) No. 398/2009 & CM Nos. 894-95/2009 (Common Order) t The respondents herein had applied for the post of Assistant Public Prosecutor in the Directorate of Prosecution, Govt. of NCT of Delhi. Since the applications submitted by them initially were defective, their candidature was cancelled. These respondents have approached the Tribunal and in all these cases the Tribunal has passed interim directions dated 14.1.2009 directing the petitioner (UPSC) to allow them to appear in \ the interview. The petitions filed by them are still pending. This interim direction is challenged by the UPSC by filing the instant writ petitions. One of the grounds stated is that when the order is passed on 14.1.2009, it was the last date of holding the interview and the Interview Board had expired on 14.1.2009 and, therefore, it is not now possible to carry out the directions of the Tribunal. Since the applications of the respondents are still pending and if they are allowed the Tribunal can Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified ' -sc. - always pass appropriate directions and the Interview Board expired on 14.1.2009 itself, it would be open to the petitioner to approach the Tribunal and point out the aforesaid fact. In view of the aforesaid, we are not going into the validity of the directions, though the same are also challenged on various other grounds. These writ petitions are disposed of on the aforesaid grounds. ^ Dasti. J. SURESH KAIT, J. January 21, 2009 nsk