max nocaqOm Oxxbja >”Iu w__nbm1cx wmaggagimgagi gAgmg w igimmaaawwmmmggwm 1$§v w $mi%.mim ££mul§xmm §H§n§y§§f§w¢dw& gmWmag gawgmm Egg A $§§Q§$m¢§xw §§§4ggg gag w §§%%%mw&§ . A‘wgmggggw gggaoag m gummvwmgm»4wwq§ww §§§§$§AjV §§§§§§§§ M. Q£%Q%g&§& Madmmwmimggggg gaggagamgmg? gmqgmg m £§§$§3mmm§$yg§ gmm mwgamagaygwq §w§ 7 W §§§§a§m§mmg «Egmuoé ® §$§£|Q%|$%§&&‘ .EANEWEiwqE»? §3§§§gg géEagV a gmm magQ I? n: A g. % gag §2§K§ g , a @gvggwgggi gggv mg? (new) WW,WW37?I§$H¥IW aw w W aw (W) 3mm WW, W (mo) \ 13 WWI-gam35aémwa? am 212m mm, 31W W (mam), W W m, mg? (wow) UerSug ’ Harm W m— W, W W $3M, ma W, mm (We) Wt aw.Q’cIWWgW m W, swag? (30m) ole under Articie 226 & 227 of the Constituticn of tndia) 58: Hon’ble Mr. Satish K. Agnihom, J. 12 in) (Writ Petition Am Shrl Shr§ PS. V.V.S. Koshy, Murthy, counseiforthe Deputy Advocate petmoner, Generai for the State. Present: aRAL oRDER (?assed on 7'“ February,2oos) Learned counsei appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioners are g of 1991. The of 1991 is the same which the petitioners are ' relief ciaimed in 0A. No, 1979 to the applicant in Original Appiioation No. i97 simiiariy situated g in this petition. Thus, teamed counsel prays that this petition be disposed claimin or in the same terms of o.A.Noi197e er wet 2) Shri V.V.S. Murthy, iearned Deputy Advooate General appearing for the OUHSBI ubmits that the same order may be respondents/State does not contravert the submission made by learned c appearing for the petitioners.- Leamed counsel s passed subject to verification of the‘facts. 43—1 999 has made it ciear that the relief has 3) The State in its repiy dated 30 been given to those petitioners, who have gonebefore the Tribunal. The said para l reads as foliows: “aa %%WWWWWW$ 4) in View of the categoricai statement made in the reium, *Lms petition is anawed in the sam$ terms La, if the Committee finds them suitabie for the post in ii respects, they shall be reguiarizeci on the post heid by them and shaii aiso pay them salary on reguiar scale They shaii be entitled to eatery for the dates on break in service. Their seniority ehan be counted from the dates 6f thegjni’tiaL appointments. i _ SdF Satish K. Agnihotri ‘3 Judge Raju