ORDER 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner is heard on the question of admission through video conferencing. 2. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner challenging the orders dated 25.8.2020 (Annexure P/1) and 2.9.2020 (Annexure P/6) whereby the petitioner has been directed to repatriated to his parent department. 3. The challenge is made by the petitioner inter-alia on the ground that the orders impugned have been issued by the authority without any competence. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that earlier also identical issue has been raised before this Court i n W P No.12843/2020- Mohanlal Bachle and others v. State of M.P. and others along with other connected petitions, which have been decided by a common order dated 29th September, 2020, in which identical orders issued in respect of the petitioners therein, as have been issued in the present case, have been set aside by this Court allowing the said petitions and giving liberty to the respondents to pass fresh orders in accordance with law. 5. Shri Nema appearing on behalf of respondents No.3 and 4 though opposed the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, but, in view of the fact that the issue involved has already been decided by this Court allowing the petitions, I am of the opinion that this petition also deserves to be allowed. 6. Accordingly, this petition i s allowed. The impugned orders dated 25.8.2020 (Annexure P/1) and 2.9.2020 (Annexure P/6) are hereby set aside. However, liberty is granted to the respondents to pass a fresh order in accordance with law, if so requires, and before passing order and taking decision, an opportunity of hearing be provided to the petitioner. 7. This petition is accordingly allowed and disposed of. Anil Seth for Petitioner; Anand Nayak, Panel Lawyer for respondents No. 1 and 2; Sarthak Nema for respondents No. 3 and 4.