JUDGMENT : S.N. Prasad, J. This writ petition is under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India preferred by Union of India through its General Manager, East Coast Railway, Bhubaneswar whereby and where under the order passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack on 30.01.2017 in O.A. No.244 of 2014 has been assailed wherein the learned Tribunal has granted the benefit of upgradation in pay scale under Assured Career Progression Scheme by counting the period of training undergone by the applicant. 2. The brief facts of the case of the opposite party – applicant before the Tribunal was that he has joined the training after following all the formalities and on successful completion has been taken into the cadre with effect from 29.03.1988 and thereafter has been regularized on 03.09.1991 as skilled Grade-III (Welder). The applicant has raised his grievance that he be given the benefit of upgradation in pay scale under the scheme formulated by the authorities by counting the period of 12 years from the date of his initial appointment, but when the same has not been considered by the authorities, he has approached the Tribunal and the Tribunal, after taking note the entire aspect of the matter, has passed an order holding therein that he is entitled to be given upgradation of pay scale under the Assured Career Progression Scheme by counting 12 years of service from the date of his initial appointment, the said order is under challenge before this court by way of this writ petition inter alia on the ground that the training period ought not to have been counted for the purpose of counting the 12 years of continuous service. 3. Mr. Avijit Pal, learned counsel representing the Union of India has tried to strengthen his argument by submitting that so many circulars have been issued by the East Coast Railway which provides condition that the period undergone on training cannot be counted for the purpose of counting the 12 years of service, rather the 12 years was to be counted from the date when the period of training has been completed. He submits that the petitioner since has got pre training, i.e. before entering into service, as such the pre training period should not have been directed to be counted by the Tribunal for the purpose of counting the continuous service to extend the benefit of Assured Career Progression Scheme. He, however, has submitted that if the training period is in service then the 12 years can be counted from the date of initial appointment. 4. For the self same relief other cases have been filed by Union of India being W.P.(C) Nos.16565 of 2016, 18879, 6749 of 2015, 7958, 7961, 16965, 17482, 17484 and 18035 of 2016 and this court, after hearing learned counsels for the parties have passed a common judgment on 01.05.2017. Since the issue has already been settled by us, instead of issuing notice, we though it proper to dispose of the case in the light of judgment passed by this court on 01.5.2017. 5. We have perused the documents available on record as also appreciated the argument advanced on behalf of learned counsel representing the Union of India who has not disputed the fact that similar issue fell for consideration before this court in W.P.(C) Nos.16565 of 2016, 18879, 6749 of 2015, 7958, 7961, 16965, 17482, 17484 and 18035 of 2016 which has already been disposed of vide order dtd.1.5.2017. We, after going through the order passed by this court passed in those writ petitions, have found that the issue involved in this case is similar to that of those writ petitions and since we have dismissed the writ petitions affirming the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal by passing a detail order in those writ petitions, hence this writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order passed by this court in W.P.(C) Nos.16565 of 2016, 18879, 6749 of 2015, 7958, 7961, 16965, 17482, 17484 and 18035 of 2016 disposed of on 1.5.2017. Accordingly this writ petition stands dismissed.