37 WP 6593-26 AND 40-C.DOC Priya Soparkar IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6593 OF 2026 Manojkumar Sheonath Pandey and anr. …Petitioners Versus The State of Maharashtra and ors. …Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO. 8801 OF 2026 The State of Maharashtra and anr. …Petitioners Versus Abhijit Bajirao Raundal and ors. …Respondents Mr. Chandrakant T. Chandratre, with Mr. J. A. Udaipuri and Mr. Vinay Bhodge, for the Petitioners in WP No.6593 of 2026. Ms. P. J. Gavhane, AGP, for the State in WP No.6593 of 2026. Mr. Yashodeep Deshmukh, with Ms. Vaidehi P. and Mr. Pratham Gawali, for the Respondents No.2 to 5 in WP No.6593 of 2026. Ms. Pooja Patil, AGP, for the Petitioners-State in WP No.8801 of 2026. Mr. Yashodeep Deshmukh, with Ms. Vaidehi P. and Mr. Pratham Gawali, for the Respondents in WP No.8801 of 2026. CORAM: SUMAN SHYAM & ADVAIT M. SETHNA, JJ. DATED: 31st JULY 2026. PC:- 1. Writ Petition No.6593 of 2026 is directed against the interim order dated 7th August, 2025 passed by the learned Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT), Mumbai in Original Application PRIYA RAJESH SOPARKAR Digitally signed by PRIYA RAJESH SOPARKAR Date: 2026.08.01 11:01:24 +0530 37 WP 6593-26 AND 40-C.DOC (OA) No.749 of 2025, instituted by the Respondents No.2 to 5 as Original Applicants in this Writ Petition. 2. Ms. P. J. Gavhane, learned AGP appearing for the State submits that the said interim order dated 7th August, 2025 has also been challenged by the State of Maharashtra by filing Writ Petition No.8801 of 2026. 3. Heard Mr. Chandrakant T. Chandratre, learned counsel appearing for the Writ Petitioner in Writ Petition No.6593 of 2026. We have also heard submissions of Ms. Pooja Patil, learned AGP appearing for the State in Writ Petition No. 8801 of 2026 as well as the counsel for the private Respondents. 4. The core controversy involved in this Writ Petition, as apparent from the material on record, is pertaining an interim order passed by the learned Tribunal permitting the State to continue the ongoing process of promotion to the post of Executive Engineer in the department of Irrigation under the Government of Maharashtra but the State has been restrained from issuing any final order of promotion till the next date which was fixed on 26th 37 WP 6593-26 AND 40-C.DOC August, 2025. The interim order has apparently been extended from time to time. 5. It is the contention of the Writ Petitioners in both the Writ Petitions that continuation of the stay order is adversely affecting the interest of the eligible candidates as well as the Department. Ms. Patil submits that since the time the order dated 7th August, 2025 was passed, the entire promotional process has been completed and therefore, it is a fit case either for expeditious hearing and disposal of Original Application and/or suitably modifying the interim order dated 7th August, 2025, by keeping 25% posts reserved, so as to accommodate the original Applicants if they succeed in the Original Application. 6. Mr. Chandrakant T. Chandratre, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners in Writ Petition No.6593 of 2026 has pressed for expeditious hearing and disposal of the Original Application, so as to avoid multiplicity of suits and legal proceedings in the matters. 7. After hearing the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and on going through the materials on record, we are of the view that since the order dated 7th August, 2025 is merely an 37 WP 6593-26 AND 40-C.DOC interim order which aim at maintaining the status-quo till the OA is finally disposed of, the same does not call for any interference. It has also brought to their notice that the Original Application itself is fixed for final hearing on 6th August, 2026. 8. We, therefore, dispose of these Writ Petitions by making a request to the learned Tribunal to conduct hearing of the Original Application, as expeditiously as possible and pass final order, preferably within three months from the date of hearing the Original Application. 9. We also make it clear that if for any reason, the matter cannot be heard and disposed of within the aforesaid time-frame, then in that event, it would be open for the State to seek modification of the order dated 7th August, 2025. 10. With the above observations, both the Writ Petitions stand disposed of. (ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.) (SUMAN SHYAM, J.) {