S.B. Sinha, J. - (1.)This appeal is directed against an interim order dated August 26, 1993, passed by Susanta Chatterji J. in CO. No. 10472(W) of 1993, whereby and whereunder the said learned Judge, inter alia, directed that the pendency of the writ petition will not prevent the writ Petitioner from filing a reply to the second show -cause and the Respondent will proceed with the enquiry and pass a final order and communicate the same to the Petitioner, but no effect should be given to the final order without the leave of the Court.
(2.)The writ Petitioner/Respondent herein filed a writ petition, inter alia, questioning a notice issued to him whereby and whereunder he was asked to show cause as to. why he should not be dismissed from services.
(3.)Before proceeding to consider the rival contentions of the parties, the following fact may be noticed.
A charge -sheet was issued to the writ Petitioner/Respondent on August 6, 1990, whereto he submitted his reply on August 27, 1990. A notice of enquiry was served on him on June 5, 1 991, whereupon the writ Petitioner raised an objection with regard to the appointment of the enquiry officer. A writ petition was filed by the Respondent on December 12, 1991, inter alia, questioning the legality or validity of the said charge -sheet as also the propriety of appointment of the said enquiry officer who was said to be below in rank to the writ Petitioner. In the said writ petition an interim order was passed on December 19, 1991, to the following effect: The Respondent shall change the Enquiry Officer and appoint a disinterested officer to be the Enquiry Officer in this case.

The enquiry shall be proceeded strictly in accordance with appropriate service rules and giving all necessary reasonable opportunity to the Petitioner to defend the case. It is for the Respondent to lead evidence first and thereafter the Petitioner shall be directed to enter into the defence.

;