JUDGEMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. 2. It appears that the petitioners were appointed as Assistant Teachers in the reserved category of Scheduled Tribe on the basis of their cast certificate as Gond caste. Subsequently, it was reported that Gond caste does not fall in the category of Scheduled Tribe and falls under the category of backward caste. In the light of said report, by order dated 13.7.2001, as contained in Annexure-3, the District Superintendent of Education cancelled the appointments of the petitioners against the reserved category of Scheduled Tribe. Petitioners have challenged the said order in this writ application. 3. The petitioners have filed a supplementary affidavit today alongwith which a Gazette notification has been annexed as Annexure-18/A published by the State Government by which the Gond caste has been held to be falling under the category of Scheduled Tribe. A communication with regard to the said decision taken by the State Government, made to all the sub-ordinate authorities through letter no. 2410 dated 23.7.2007, has been annexed as Annexure-19. The petitioners have also annexed their caste certificates which have been re-issued by the concerned authorities showing the petitioners to be in the category of Scheduled Tribe. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in view of this subsequent development and the final decision taken by the State Government putting Gond caste under the category of Scheduled Tribe the very basis of the cancellation of the appointment of the petitioners becomes non est and therefore Annexure-3 canceling their appointments is fit to be quashed. He submits that since the cancellation of the apppointments of the petitioner is apparently on non est grounds, the petitioners are also entitled for salary of the entire period sub-sequent to issue of Annexure-3. He also submits that petitioners have not been paid their salary of period for which they have actually worked till Annexure-3 was issued. 5. Learned counsel for the State fairly submits that in view of the Gazette notification, the communication and the re-issued caste certificate of the petitioners, the petitioners are entitled to be restored to their services. 6. So far payment of the salary of the petitioners for the period they have actually worked, it is submitted by learned counsel for respondents that the petitioners are entitled for the same and necessary directions may be issued for that purpose. 6. So far payment of the salary of the petitioners for the period they have actually worked, it is submitted by learned counsel for respondents that the petitioners are entitled for the same and necessary directions may be issued for that purpose. However, so far period subsequent to the issue of Annexure-3 is concerned, learned counsel for the State submits that since this final decision has been taken by the State Government on the basis of final decision of the Supreme Court in the long drawn controversy therefore, the respondents were not at fault in delaying restoration of services of the petitioners. Therefore, the prayer of the petitioner for salary subsequent to issue of Annexure-3 should be rejected. 7. Apparently, in view of the Gazette notification, the communication and the caste certificate placed on records through the supplementary affidavit filed today by the petitioners, Annexure-3 is fit to be quashed and the same is hereby quashed. It is directed that the petitioners shall be restored to their services and they will be deemed to have been continuing throughout in service for the purposes of continuity of service and seniority. 8. So far salary of the period for which they have actually worked prior to the issue of Annexure-3 the same has also be paid to the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 9. So far salary of the period subsequent to Annexure-3 is concerned, this Court is not inclined to pass any order in this regard as it is difficult to find from the material on record the specific cause for delay in restoration of the services of the petitioners. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioners prays that the petitioners may be given liberty to file a representation for the said purpose. That liberty is granted to the petitioners. 11. The writ application is accordingly allowed with above directions.