( 1 ) LEAVE is granted. ( 2 ) THE State is in appeal against the order passed by the High Court in writ Petition No. 1433 of 1994 on 4-4-2000. Though this Court does not normally interfere with the interim orders passed by the High Courts, it is a fit case which warrants our interference on the peculiar facts of this case. ( 3 ) THE respondent was dismissed from service on 4-6-1979. On a challenge against the said order before the U. P. Public Service Tribunal, the said order of dismissal from service was stayed. Eventually his petition came to be dismissed on 15-1-1994. The respondent assailed the validity of the said order of the Tribunal before the High Court in the aforementioned writ petition. No interim order was granted on the writ petition which was filed in march 1994 and, in our view, rightly. After six years of filing of the writ petition the impugned interim order was passed on 4-4-2000 while listing the case to be heard in the month of August 2000. We are unable to appreciate the urgency to pass interim order after about six years of issuing rule nisi, when the High Court was inclined to hear the matter on merits in August 2000. The circumstances of the case did not justify passing the impugned interim order at that stage. The consequence of the said order is that the respondent who was out of service from 1994, has to be reinstated pending disposal of writ petition which was to be heard in August 2000. This is neither just nor equitable nor is it in consonance with the principles of granting interim orders. We therefore allow this appeal and set aside the impugned interim order. There shall be no order as to costs.