1 W.A. No.222/2011 Date: 13.12.2011 Ms. M. Ravindran, learned Dy.G.A., for the appellants. Shri A.K. Sethi, learned senior Advocate with Shri Kamal Aireen Adv., for the respondent. Heard. O R D E R By filing this intra Court appeal under Section 2(1) of Madhya Pradesh Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypith Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005, the appellants have challenged the order dated 13.7.2010 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. No.4692/2009(S). Following is the operative paragraph of the order passed by the learned Single Judge :- “8. Resultantly, all the writ petitions are allowed. The respondents are directed to consider the case of all the petitioners afresh for grant of regular pay scale, on completion of five years' service, keeping in view the executive directions dated 17.3.1978 of the Finance Department of the State Government. Not only this, the respondents shall also take into account their earlier order dated 14.5.1996, which has been upheld by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.128/2006, while considering the case of the petitioners for grant of regular pay scale. In case, the respondents arrive at the conclusion that the petitioners are 2 identically placed persons and are entitled for grant of regular pay scale, on completion of five years' service, the respondents shall grant all consequential benefits to the petitioners, by fixing the pay etc. of the petitioners notionally. The petitioners shall also be entitled for arrears of pay fixation from the date of filing the present writ petition.” Having regard to the aforesaid order, we find that the learned Single Judge has directed to consider the case of the petitioners afresh for grant of regular pay scale on completion of five years' service, keeping in view the executive instructions dated 17.3.1978 issued by the Finance Department of the State Government. The learned Single Judge has also directed that the respondent shall take into account the earlier order dated 14.5.1996, which has been affirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No.128/2006 and while taking decision the same has to be taken into account. We find that the direction is only about consideration and in the circumstances no case is made out to interfere in the matter. Accordingly the writ appeal stands disposed of. (SHANTANU KEMKAR) (PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA) JUDGE JUDGE Trilok/-