1 W.P. No.20648/2011 20/12/2011: Shri M. K. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S. K. Singh , learned Panel Lawyer, for respondents/State. During the course of argument learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the subject matter of the present petition is covered by judgment passed by this Court in W.P. No.4222/2005 (O.A. No. 2727/1996) - Nathuram Ahirwar Vs. State of M.P. & Others decided on 8.8.2005 and the relevant paragraphs from the said decision are reproduced as under :- "....2. Shri Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner by inviting my attention to order Annexure A-1 dated 21.3.89 and Annexure A-2 has submitted that petitioner is member of Police Force in terms of M.P. Police Regulations and he has been directed to serve on the post of Assistant Previous Conviction Detective (Constable). The contention of learned counsel is that salary and the allowances admissible to this post shall be paid to the petitioner. 3. On the other hand, Shri Tiwari, learned Dy. Govt. Advocate has submitted that on going through Annexure A-1 it is gathered that the petitioner was earlier serving as Constable in Home Guard and thereafter he has been appointed on the post of Assistant Previous Conviction Detective (Constable) and, therefore, the impugned recovery order Annexure A-5 dated 6.6.96 has been rightly issued by the Government. 4. It has been seen that vide order dated 6.12.96 operation of the impugned order Annex. A-5 has 2 already been stayed by the Tribunal and that order is still in force. On going through Annex. A-2 which is issued by the District Superintendent of Police and which is part of service roll of the petitioner, it is gathered that he has been appointed in Police Force under Act V of 1861 and powers, functions and privileges of a police officer have been vested in him. In this view of the matter, respondents are hereby directed to pay salary to the petitioner of the post of Constable since it has been mentioned in his appointment order Annex. A-1 that he is appointed on temporary basis on the post of A.P.C.D. (Constable). The petitioner shall be entitled to be fixed in the corresponding pay scale of that post and the allowances admissible to a Police Constable. If after working out the salary of the post of Constable, on which the petitioner is serving and allowances admissible to him, any amount is still due upon the petitioner according to the rules, a show cause notice be issued to the petitioner and opportunity of hearing may be provided to him and thereafter any order may be passed. At present order dated 6.6.96 (Annexure A-5) so far as it relates to the petitioner, is hereby quashed. 5. The petition is allowed to the extent indicated hereinabove. No costs." It is further submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that against the aforesaid order dated 8.8.2005 a writ appeal was preferred by the State Government which was registered as W.A. No. 490/2008 wherein vide order dated 15.9.2008 Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court has upheld the order dated 8.8.2005. Thereafter, the State Government also preferred a Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 29936/2008 which has been dismissed vide order dated 19.12.2008. 3 In view of the aforesaid, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner herein whether the petitioner is also entitled to be given the benefit of the order dated 8.8.2005 passed by this Court in W.P. No.4222/2005 which has already been reproduced in the foregoing paragraph. In case the respondents come to the conclusion that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the said judgment quoted in the earlier paragraph then the same benefit shall be conferred upon the petitioner. The petitioner shall furnish a certified copy of the order passed today along with copy of the order passed in W.P. No.4222/2005 and thereafter the respondents shall decide the case of the petitioner by passing a speaking order. Petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid. C.C. as per rules. (Rajendra Menon) Judge Mrs.mishra