ORDER : Lalitha Kanneganti, J The writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents in not granting the pay scale of Rs.1010-1800 even though the petitioner possessed ITI qualification in terms of the Revised Pay Scales 1986 by taking into consideration of the orders passed in O.A.No.4206 of 1992 dated 04.02.2003 and the Judgment in W.P.No.8768 of 2003 dated 21.06.2004, which was confirmed by the Apex Court and also in the light of G.O.Rt.No.551 dated 06.08.2004 as well as G.O.Rt.No.361 dated 10.05.2019 and for a consequential direction to grant the pay scale of Rs.1010-1800 on par with the similarly situated persons in terms of the judgments and the G.Os. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services, representing the respondents. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed as a Tracer on compassionate grounds in the year 1987 and presently he is working as Technical Officer, (DM.Gr.I), O/o Executive Engineer, Irrigation Special Division, Vijayawada. According to the Revised Pay Scales, 1986, the employees possessing ITI qualification are eligible for the pay scale of Rs.1010-1800/-. This applies to in-service candidate or new recruitees from the date of possessing the said qualification. When some of the employees, who are aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not sanctioning Revised Pay Scales have approached the A.P Administrative Tribunal by filing O.A.No.4206 of 1992. The tribunal after a full fledged hearing allowed the O.A. by its order dated 04.02.2003 directing the respondents to give the benefit of scale of pay Rs.1010-1800 on par with similarly situated persons. However the benefits were granted prospectively i.e. from the date of filing of O.A. 4. Aggrieved thereby, the Government has approached this Court by filing W.P.No.8768 of 2003, which was dismissed on 21.06.2004 and aggrieved thereby, the Government further carried the matter to the Supreme Court. When the orders of the tribunal were not complied with, a contempt petition was moved before the tribunal and the tribunal took a serious note of the same. Then the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.551 dated 06.08.2004 by implementing orders in O.A.No.4206 of 1992 subject to outcome of the SLP before the Supreme Court. The SLP preferred before the Supreme Court was dismissed on 02.05.2005. 5. Then the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.551 dated 06.08.2004 by implementing orders in O.A.No.4206 of 1992 subject to outcome of the SLP before the Supreme Court. The SLP preferred before the Supreme Court was dismissed on 02.05.2005. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as the petitioner possessed ITI qualification as on the date of his appointment, he is entitled to be benefited as per the orders of the tribunal in O.A.No.4206 of 1992 and batch. It appears that when the efforts before the authorities were not successful, the petitioner approached the tribunal by filing O.A.No.4111 of 2016. Subsequently, the Government issued G.O.Rt.No.361 dated 10.05.2019 whereby the Government has permitted the Engineer-in-Chief, PR, AP, Vijayawada to implement the orders of the tribunal dated 07.04.2016 in O.A.No.3436 of 2016 and also to implement in respect of employees who are working in Panchayat Raj Engineering Department and similarly situated (Work charged Work Inspectors with ITI qualification), so that they may not be given chance to file cases in the Courts by each and everyone on the same issue. Therefore, it is the case of the petitioner that in view of the fact that he possessed ITI qualification and in the light of the orders of the tribunal, which attained finality and in view of the G.O.Rt.No.361 dated 10.05.2019 issued by the Government, he is entitled to the pay scale of Rs.1010-1800. 6. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for Services, appearing on behalf of the respondents sought time for instructions. However, taking into consideration the fact that the G.O.Rt.No.361 dated 10.05.2019 and the orders passed by the tribunal, this Court as well as the Apex Court, we deem it appropriate to direct the petitioner to make a fresh representation before the respondents within a period of ten days from the date of this order and on receipt of such representation, the respondents shall consider the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate order within a period of four weeks in accordance with law. 7. With the aforesaid directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed.