Interim relief cannot grant the main substantive relief; impugned orders set aside and matter remitted for decision on merits.

An interim order that stayed a relieving order and directed continuation in service was treated as having granted the substantive relief at an interlocutory stage, making the Tribunal's approach unsustainable. The SC held that such interim directions could not effectively decide the original application on merits, and the High Court's affirmation was also not sustainable. The impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remitted to the Tribunal for expeditious disposal on merits, with liberty to file reply and rejoinder.

---

---

Issues: Whether the interim order passed by the Tribunal, which stayed the relieving order and directed continuation in service, had in effect granted the main relief and whether the matter required reconsideration by the Tribunal on merits.

Analysis: The order recorded that the interim directions virtually decided the original application itself by granting the substantive relief at an interlocutory stage. On that basis, the Tribunal's order and the High Court's affirmation were found unsustainable. The matter was therefore sent back to the Tribunal for an expeditious hearing on merits, with liberty to file reply and rejoinder.

Outcome: The impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remitted to the Tribunal for decision on merits.

---