JUDGMENT Amareshwar Sahay, J. 1. Heard Mr. Nilesh Kumar learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. J. Mishra JC to GP-I. 2. From Annexure-18 of the supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioners it appears that the notification contained in Memo No. 2231, dated 26.9.2000 was under challenge in WP (S) No. 2395 of 2001 with WP (S) No. 2362 of 2001 with WP (S) No. 3995 of 2001; whereby the time bound promotion given to the petitioners was cancelled and direction was made to recover the amount paid to them in excess in view of the time bound promotion. This Court by order dated 20.1.2003 allowed the aforementioned writ petitions and quashed the notification contained in Memo No. 2231, dated 26.9.2000 so far as those writ petitioners are concerned. 3. Similar matter challenging the said very notification dated 26.9.2000 came for consideration before this Court in WP (S) No. 2615 of 2001 and WP (S) No. 2649 of 2001 and this Court following the order passed in WP (S) No. 2395 of 2001 with analogous cases allowed the aforesaid two writ petitions and quashed the said very notification dated 26.9.2000 with regard to those petitioners. 4. Again the said very notification contained in Memo No. 2231 dated 26.9.2000 is under challenge in the present writ petition in which there are 146 petitioners. 5. Considering the fact that the present case is also exactly on the same facts and footing, this writ petition is also followed and order dated 26.9.2000 as contained in Annexure-16 to the present writ petition, so far as the petitioners are concerned is hereby quashed in the same term as that of WP (S) No. 2395 of 2001 with analogous cases and WP (S) No. 2615 of 2001 with WP (S) No. 2649 of 2001.