( 1 ) BY way of this petition, the petitioners have prayed to issue writ or any other type of writ or order or direction quashing and setting aside the impugned Judgment and order dated 28. 2. 2003 passed by the learned Central administrative Tribunal (for short "cat") in Review Application No. 10 of 2003 and to quash and set aside the impugned Judgment and order dated 28. 3. 2002 passed by the CAT in O. A. No. 180 of 1996.

( 2 ) INITIALLY, this petition was placed for admission before the Division Bench of this Court (B. J. Shethna and A. H. Mehta, JJ. ). Speaking for the Bench, one of us (B. J. Shethna,j.) dismissed the same by order dated 24. 6. 2003. It is a brief order which we would like to reproduce hereunder :"heard learned Counsel Shri Nagarkar for the petitioner. Apart from the fact that almost identical petition i. e. Special Civil Application No. 8405 of 2003 was dismissed only yesterday, 23. 6. 2003, it clearly appears that after Review application No. 10 of 2003 filed in O. A. No. 180 of 1996 was dismissed by the tribunal on 28. 2. 2003, the petition themselves files M. A. No. 125 of 2003 before the tribunal in O. A. No. 180 of 1996 and prayed for 8 months time to implement the order of the tribunal. It further clearly appears from the order dated 25. 2. 2003 passed by the tribunal on M. A. No. 125 of 2003 that they had asked for extension for 8 months. The Tribunal granted time to implement the order till 30. 6. 2003 as the Tribunal was of the considered opinion that it had already granted 3 months time in the O. A. itself and the said time also passed without any progress. Under the circumstances, there is no question of interfering with the order impugned in this petition. In view of the above, this petition is summarily dismissed. "

( 3 ) THE aforesaid order passed by the Division Bench of this Court on 24. 6. 2003 was challenged by the petitioner by way of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 17545 of 2003. While granting the SLP, Civil Appeal No. 1183 of 2005, filed by the petitioner, was allowed by the Honble Supreme Court and the Judgment and order dated 24. 6. 2003, passed by the Division Bench of this Court in this petition was set aside and the matter was remitted to this court to hear afresh and pass reasoned order. While disposing of the matter the Honble Supreme Court also expressed hope that the High Court will take all necessary steps to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible. It is a brief order, therefore, we would like to reproduce the same which is as under :"special Leave Granted. We have heard Counsel for the parties and peruse the Judgment of the High Court. There is no discussion in the Judgment of the High court on the merit of the case, and the High Court has dismissed the Special Civil Application without even adverting to the facts of the case. We are of the view that in the facts and circumstances of this case, summary dismissal was not warranted. We, therefore, allow this Appeal, set aside the judgment and order dated 24. 6. 2003 and remit the matter to the High Court to hear the matter afresh and pass a reasoned order. We have no doubt that the High court will take all necessary steps to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible. The Appeal is allowed. "

( 4 ) ON remand the matter was placed before the Honble Ist Court consisting of Honble Chief Justice Mr. Justice Bhawani Singh and H. K. Rathod, J. and on 9. 5. 2005 Their Lordships admitted this petition by issuing Rule making it returnable on 29. 6. 2005. However, on 29. 6. 2005 following order was passed by Their Lordships :"post this matter before the Division Bench comprising of Honble Messrs. Justices B. J. Shethna and M. C. Patel, in the next week. "

( 5 ) ACCORDINGLY, it was placed before this court on 6. 7. 2005 and on the request of learned Counsel for the parties it was adjourned to 21. 7. 2005 and on 21. 7. 2005 it was adjourned to 17. 8. 2005. However, for some or the other reason the m