Order

1.We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.This appeal by special leave is directed against the impugned interlocutory order dated 23th November, 2000 in Writ Petition No. 2209 of 2000 passed by the High Court of Bombay. The prayer in that writ petition was for quashing the order of the Education Inspector, Greater Mumbai dated 30.9.2000. The order dated 30.9.2000 states that since certain appointments of teachers were made by the Dayanand Vedic Vidyalaya, Mumbai in violation of the Rules, approval for such appointments is rejected.

3.In our opinion in such a petition there was no scope for grant of any interim order, and instead the writ petition should have been decided finally at an early dated. However, what the High Court has done by the impugned interim order is to direct grant of adhoc approval to some teachers.

4.This is a strange order passed by the High Court. There is no provision in the rules for grant of adhoc approval. Either approval is granted, or the prayer is rejected. There is no scope for a half way measure like that adopted by the High Court. We cannot appreciate such kind of interim orders which really amount to grant of final relief. This kind of pr