Ajay Rastogi, J. - (1.) THESE cognate cases involving common controversy, at joint request, have been finally heard at admission stage.
(2.) IT has not been controverted that appeals preferred by respective applicants (Petitioners herein) are pending adjudication before Service Appellate Tribunal and the controversy raised at the bar are yet to be examined on merits. These petitions have been filed only with a limited grievance that a number of appeals were preferred by applicants working as Constable (MT) and the Respondents took decision depriving them of emoluments admissible to constables working in the technical wing -against which appeals were preferred before the Tribunal. But what has been alleged by Petitioners is that in some of appeals interim orders were passed by learned Tribunal pursuant thereto, emoluments are being made available to respective applicants and they were allowed to continue as Constable (MT); However when appeals preferred by present Petitioners came up for consideration, their prayer for interim relief was rejected by learned Tribunal which has caused prejudice to them; as such have approached this Court by way of instant petitions.
(3.) THIS Court while passing interim order dt.22/12/2010 in CWP -14180/2010 directed the Respondents to maintain status quo and allow the Petitioners to work as Constable (MT) held prior to the order assailed in appeal before the Tribunal till further orders.;