JUDGMENT G.A. Sanap, J. - Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner. 2. Learned Advocate for the petitioner has placed on record the affidavit to substantiate his contention that respondent No.1 has been duly served but nobody appears for the respondent No.1. 3. Shri S.V. Sirpurkar, learned AGP for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 seeks time to file reply. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner was appointed in 2001. The petitioner has received notice of termination from the service of respondent No.1 dated 25.10.2021. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that petitioner was employed on the basis of caste certificate issued on 31.07.1987 by the office of respondent No.3. Learned Advocate submits that now the respondent No.3 vide letter dated 01.11.2021 on being approached by the petitioner has stated that relevant papers are not sufficient to conclude the caste certificate in question was issued are not for his office based on this communication the notice for termination of service of the petitioner. Learned Advocate for the petitioner therefore, submits that till the time petitioner is finally heard the petitioner needs to be protected. 5. Shri S.V. Sirpurkar, learned AGP submits that respondent Nos. 2 and 3 would like to place on record the relevant material with the reply. 6. In my view, it would be necessary to protect the interest of petitioner. This issue of the caste validity of the petitioner has been cropped up for the first time in 2021. 7. In view of this position, it would be necessary to protect the interest of the petitioner in terms of prayer clause 2. 8. It is accordingly, ordered that till the next date of hearing the respondents shall not act upon the termination notice dated 21.10.2021. 9. The petitioner shall serve the copy of this order to the respondent No.1. 10. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable on 25.11.2021. 11. Shri S.V. Sirpurkar, learned AGP waives service of notice for respondent Nos. 2 and 3.