WP(C) 818/2008 BEFORE HON BLE MR JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY HON’BLE MR JUSTICE U.B.SAHA ( Amitava Roy,J) Heard Mr R. Sharma, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India, Gauhati High Court, Guwahati and Mr S.Dutta, learned counsel for the respondent(s) in WP( C) No.818/2008, WP( C) No.822/2008 and WP( C) No.1133/2008. None appears for the re spondent in WP( C) No.821/2008 and WP( C) No.1127/2008. It is submitted at the Bar that the issue involved in these proceedings is squar ely covered by the decision of a Division Bench of this Court rendered in a batc h of writ petitions, the lead case being WP( C) No.5087/1999, Regional Director , Employees State Insurance Corporation, NE Region, Guwahati vs. Secretary, Emp loyees State Insurance Corporation Employees Union , NE Region, Bamunimaidan as well as WP( C) No.2472/2004, the Union of India and Ors vs. Rajendra Singh and O rs. The respondents herein at all relevant times (except in WP( C) No.1133/08) were Engineering Assistants under the Department of Information and Broadcasting , Govt. of India. The respondent in WP( C) No.1133/2008 was a Company Prosecutor under the Ministry of Company, NE Region under the administrative control of th e Ministry of Company Affairs, Govt. of India, New Delhi. They being aggrieved by the denial of their claim for Special Duty Allowance ( for short, hereafter referred to ’SDA’), approached the learned Central Admini strative Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, Guwahati. Their grievance was that though t hey were entitled to the said allowance under the relevant office memorandum/no tifications issued from time to time, they were denied the same in substance, on the ground that as they had been appointed to serve within the Eastern Zone o f the country, they were not entitled thereto. The learned Tribunal however, taking note of the aforementioned OM/notification s relating to the SDA for the employees declared to be entitled thereto, allowe d the claim of the respondents inter alia relying on the judgment and order date d 4.1.2006 rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in a series of writ peti tion, the lead case being WP( C) No.5089/99 [ including WP( C) No.7057/2001]. Mr Sharma has submitted in his usual fairness that in view of the adjudication made by the Division Bench of this Court in the Regional Director, Employees St ate Insurance Corporation, NE Region(Supra), the claim of the respondents herei n is covered by the decision rendered in WP( C) No.5087/99( Supra). We have perused the judgment and order dated 4.1.2006 as well the one dated 15.7 .2009 passed in WP( C) No.2472/2004 and we are of the view that the impugned dec ision of the learned Tribunal does not warrant interference at this end. The petitions are dismissed. No costs.