Judgment 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner has challenged the order as contained in Annexure 2 dated 21.12.1996 whereby and whereunder he has been terminated from services on the ground that he is an appointee after the cut-off date i.e. 20.10.1991. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel that the petitioner was appointed on Class IV post against a scale vide order dated 27.10.1991 as contained in Annexure 1 and therefore, his case would not be governed according to the cut-off date fixed by the authorities i.e. 20.10.1991. It is further submitted by learned counsel that the case of the petitioner is similarly situated to the case of Arun Kumar and Ors. in C.W.J.C. No. 5140 of 1998 which was decided by this court vide order as contained in Annexure 5 and the order of termination so far the petitioner nos. 1 to 4 was concerned, was set aside and the order of the learned Single Judge has been affirmed in LPA vide order as contained in Annexure 6. 4. From Annexure 2, it appears that the petitioner and Arun Kumar and Ors. as referred to above were terminated by the common order. Since part of the order impugned was quashed, by this court vide order as contained in Annexure 5 and duly affirmed in LPA vide order as contained in Annexure 6, in my opinion, the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the orders passed by this court as referred to above. 5. In the result, this application is allowed in terms of the orders passed by this court as contained in Annexures 5 and 6 and the order impugned so far the petitioner is concerned, is set aside.