mW,-g3?iim.m mmbwiw‘lig’fm \N g W mmwiwm WWRW évmané‘a ‘ 3B : Hon’b!e shri Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, J. 14$~Q3~2010 Shri M. D‘ Dhote, counselforthe p itioners‘ Shri Satish Gupta, GA. forthe Stat ‘ Heard. The petitioners have filed this petiti n claiming the similar benems as have been given to Asst. Teachers appointed in between the year 1983-1984 who had approached the Tribunal by fiiing Originai ppiication No‘2745!1989 (decided on 248.1992), wherein Tribunal directed bene its to be given to all teachers. It isralso stated that the State challenged the said or er before the Supreme Court in SVLP. No.6892/1 993 which was dismissed vide o er dated 3.1 r1994. in number of cases, this Cou has passed orders directing the respondents to consider the cases. Accordingly, this petition is also dis osed of with liberty to the petitioners to make representation, if so advised, to con ider their oases on its own merits and perspective. if the petitioners stand on the 5am footings as per order passed by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Trib nal in O.A. No.2?45!89 (Madhnkanz Vader and 5e others Vs. szaze ofMP. & thers) and subsequently confirmed by the Supreme Court in StLtP. (Civil) N .6882193 by order dated 31,1994, appropriate orderwould be passed by the r spondents authority.