Order Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The prayer, though initially made by the petitioner for a direction to the respondents to re-designate him as Demonstrator, has now been confined to the condition as imposted in the notification issued during the pendency of this writ application, by the respondents whereby, though the petitioner has been re-designated as Demonstrator, but with a rider that he shall not be included in the teaching cadre and neither would he get the benefits of teaching post. 3. The contention of the petitioner is that he possesses the requisite qualification constitute the eligibility criteria for the post of teacher, and as a Demonstrator, he posses all the qualifications to be considered for the post of teaching cadre and to be promoted to the post of Lecturer. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner refers in this context, to the definition of the term 'Teacher' as. given in Section 2 (v) of the Bihar State (now Jharkhand) University Act, 1976 and submits that as per the definition, the term 'Teacher'• includes Principal, University Professor, College Professor, Reader, Lecturer, Demonstrator and other person imparting instruction in department, college or institute maintained by the University. Learned counsel adds that this issue had been raised before the Supreme Court in an earlier writ application filed by similarly situated aggrieved Demonstrators and pursuant to the decision of the Supreme Court, the State of Bihar had acknowledged that the Demonstrators are part of the teaching cadre and by treating them in the teaching cadre, had granted promotion to quite a few Demonstrators to the post of Lecturer. Learned counsel refers in this context to Annexure-14 to the petitioner's supplementary affidavit, which is a notification issued by Ranchi University on 2.2.2006 and which confirms the grant of Selection Grade to the Lecturers, who upon their initial appointment, were designated as Demonstrators and later,' were promoted to the post of Lecturers. 5. In the counter affidavit of the respondents, the stand taken by them is that the petitioner's claim for being re-designated as Demonstrator, has been approved and the same has been notified. However, the petitioner's claim for being treated in the teaching cadre and for the grant of benefits in the teaching cadre, has not been accepted. 6. 5. In the counter affidavit of the respondents, the stand taken by them is that the petitioner's claim for being re-designated as Demonstrator, has been approved and the same has been notified. However, the petitioner's claim for being treated in the teaching cadre and for the grant of benefits in the teaching cadre, has not been accepted. 6. The ground assigned by the respondents does not appear to be satisfactory, particularly in the light of the petitioner's declaration that he possesses the requisite qualification which is required for the teaching post of Lecturer and also in view of the fact that the definition of the term 'Teacher' as given in Section 2(v) of Act, declares that the Demonstrators also come within the scope of the term 'Teacher'. Furthermore, the petitioner's present grievance is not an isolated instance. In fact, as pointed out by the counsel for the petitioner, similarly situated Demonstrators had raised their grievance earlier before the Court and pursuant to the directions given by the orders of the Court, the concerned authorities of the State had not only acknowledged the Demonstrators as part of the teaching cadre, but had also given them the benefits of the teaching cadre by promoting them to the post of Lecturers, though subject to the approval of the Jharkhand Public Service Commission. 7. In the light of the above facts and circumstances, this case is disposed of by remitting the matter back to the Secretary to reconsider the petitioner's claim and pass an appropriate order, in the light of the qualifications, academic and otherwise, which the petitioner possesses and also in the light of the decision taken in the case of similarly situated other employees as indicated in Annexure-15 of the writ application as well as the provisions contained in the Statute, which provides for promotion of Demonstrator to the post of Lecturer. The decision must be taken within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The petitioner may also submit a copy of this order alongwith the representation be fore the Secretary-Respondent No.1. With these observations, this writ application is disposed of.