1. Rule.
Mr. Dipen Desai waives service of Rule. Heard Mr. H.S. Munshaw for the petitioner and Mr. Dipen Desai for the respondent for grant of interim relief.
2. As stated in the Affidavit-in-Reply, after the order impugned dated 29.12.2010 was passed by the Tribunal, the petitioner has already initiated fresh inquiry and the said fact is not denied by Mr. Munshaw, learned Counsel for the petitioner. It is also averred in the petition that in fact the respondent has already approached the Tribunal for compliance of the other part of the order by way of filing Misc. Civil Application No. 3 of 2011 and the same is pending before the Tribunal.
3. Considering the fact that the petitioner has already implemented part of the order and has acquiescence without going into merits of the Misc. Civil Application No. 3 of 2011 pending before the Tribunal filed by the respondent, the interim relief as prayed for cannot be granted. It is also worthwhile to note that what is prayed in the present petition is to stay the execution, operation and implementation of the order dated 29.12.2010 ordering reinstatement of the respondent in service and grant all benefits in the interest of justice, which would amount to allowing the petition at this stage and therefore the interim relief is refused. It is however, made clear that it would be open for the petitioner to continue fresh inquiry as per order dated 29.12.2010 and the respondent is also directed to cooperate in the fresh inquiry.
Sd/-
(R.M.
Chhaya, J.) M.M.BHATT Top