JUDGMENT : P.S. Dinesh Kumar, J. 1. These appeals are presented challenging several interim directions passed by the Hon'ble Single Judge, directing the petitioners before his Lordship to deposit the tax, penalty and interest, payable in respect of the hoardings erected by the writ petitioners. 2. We have heard Sri. D.L.N. Rao and Sri. Jayakumar S. Patil, learned senior advocates appearing for the appellants and Sri. D.N. Nanjunda Reddy, learned senior advocate appearing for the respondent Corporation. 3. It is submitted by the senior advocates appearing for the appellants that the writ petitioners - appellants have deposited the undisputed tax in full. However, their dispute is with regard to the demand for the penalty and interest. 4. Sri. D.N. Nanjunda Reddy, learned senior advocate assures this Court that in the event of the appellants depositing 50% of the entire claim, the hoardings, already erected shall not be disturbed or removed. 5. Keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of these cases, though the arguments were advanced with regard to the power of the respondent - Corporation to levy penalty and interest, we are of the view that justice would be sub-served, if we request the Hon'ble Single Judge to dispose of these matters, at the earliest, subject to his Lordship's convenience. We, also, request the Hon'ble Single Judge to dispose of the pending interlocutory applications, if any. 6. All contentions of the respective appellants before this Court are kept open. 7. All payments made shall be subject to the result of the writ petitions. 8. In view of disposal of these writ appeals, the pending interlocutory applications do not survive for consideration and are, also, disposed of. 9. The appeals stand disposed of. 10. We make no order as to costs.