ORDER : M.R. SHAH, J. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 17th June 2016 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 5517 of 2003, by which the learned Single Judge has disposed of the said writ petition without further adjudication with respect to the prayer made in terms of para 23 [C] of the petition, solely on the ground that the ad interim relief/interim relief granted earlier while admitting the main petition has been implemented and the appeal against interim order has been dismissed, the appellants-original petitioners have preferred the present Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent. 2. We have heard learned advocates appearing on behalf the respective parties at length. 3. We have also perused and considered the impugned order dated 17th June 2016 passed by the learned Se Judge. 4. At the outset, it is required to be noted that as such in the petition before the learned Single Judge, the appellants herein-original petitioners prayed for the following reliefs: “(A). Quashing and setting aside the Condition nos. 2, 3 and 4 attached to the Resolution dt. 30.9.2000 (Annexure A) in so far as the petitioners are concerned; and to treat the services of the petitioners continuous for all purposes. (B). In the alternative direct the respondents nos. 1 and 2 to apply the same service conditions which are applied to the employees of the Sidhpur Municipality as per the Resolution dt. 9.2.99 (C). Directing the Respondent no. 3 to transfer the provident fund Accounts of the petitioners to the State Government, to pay the arrears becoming due and payable on account of implementation of the fourth and fifth pay commissions w.e.f 1.1.86 and w.e.f 1.1.96, the benefit of the higher grade scale, the interim relief and D.A granted by the Government from time to time, leave encashment as available on 31.3.2000 (D). During the pendency and final disposal of this petition, Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 may be directed to pay the salary to the petitioners on the basis that their service is continuous from the initial appointment with the Umreth Municipality.” 5. It appears that while admitting the aforestated Special Civil Application, the learned Single Judge has passed the following order:— “4. Hence RULE. By way of interim relief, it is directed that respondent Nos. It appears that while admitting the aforestated Special Civil Application, the learned Single Judge has passed the following order:— “4. Hence RULE. By way of interim relief, it is directed that respondent Nos. 1 and 2 shall give the petitioners the benefits which are given to the ex-employees of the Sidhpur Municipality as per Government Resolution dated 9.02.1999 This interim direction shall be complied with within two months from the date of receipt of this order. The payments to be made pursuant to the above directions shall be subject to the result of this petition. Direct service is permitted.” 6. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforestated interim order, the State preferred Letters Patent Appeal No. 1026 of 2005 which came to be dismissed by the Division Bench vide Order dated 7th October 2005. That thereafter, the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge was acted upon and the petitioners were granted benefits, which as such were given to the ex-employees of Sidhpur Municipality as per Government Resolution dated 9th February 1999. Therefore, without further adjudication and without even considering the prayer sought in terms of para 23 [c], the learned Single Judge has disposed of the aforesaid Special Civil Application. 7. It is not in dispute that while disposing of the writ petition, the learned Single Judge has not at all considered the prayer in terms of para 23 [c] of the petition. There is no adjudication on merits by the learned Single Judge whether the petitioners were entitled to relief as prayed for in terms of para 23 [C] or not. Under the circumstances, the present Letters Patent Appeal is required to be allowed to the aforestated extent and the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge in so far as it disposes of the main petition by not considering the prayer in terms of para 23 [C] of the main petition deserves to be quashed and set-aside and the matter is remanded to the learned Single Judge to consider the prayer in terms of para 23 [C] in accordance with law and on its own merits. 8. In view of the above and for the reasons aforestated, the present Appeal succeeds in part. 8. In view of the above and for the reasons aforestated, the present Appeal succeeds in part. Impugned order dated 17th June 2016 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 5517 of 2003 in so far as not considering the prayer in terms of para 23[C] of the main petition is hereby quashed and the matter is remitted to the learned Single Judge to consider the prayer sought in terms of para 23[C] of the petition which may be considered by the learned Single Judge in accordance with law and on its own merits. 9. Letters Patent Appeal stands allowed to the aforestated extent. No costs. 10. Now, registry to place the matter before the learned Single Judge taking up such matters on 18th September 2017.