JUDGMENT : Heard the parties. 2. The petitioners, who were members of the State Cadre known as Jharkhand Prosecution Service, being appointed as Assistant Public Prosecutor, have approached this Court for direction commanding upon the respondents to sanction the pay scale of 8000-13500 at par with the pay scale granted to the State Services employees in view of Resolution No. 3589 dated 17.12.2007. 3. At the very outset, Mr. R.R. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that similar issue fell for consideration before this Court in W.P.(S) No. 799 of 2009, decided on 19.12.2017 in the case of Brahma Nath Sharma & Another Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors., wherein, this Court has held as under:- “After hearing the respective parties at length and giving my anxious consideration to the documents on record and upon going through the decision rendered by this Court reported in 2016 (4) JLJR (Anand and Ors. Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Ors.), I am of the considered view that the petitioners are entitled to the benefit as has been extended in the decision reported supra. Accordingly, the respondent authorities are directed to grant and sanction the pay scale of Rs. 8000-13500/- to the petitioners like other State Services employees in accordance with the decision of the State Government in resolution dated 17.12.2007 as contained in Annexure-6 to the writ petition, whereby the benefit of pay scale of Rs. 8000-13,500/- was given to the officers of the State Services, notionally with effect from 15.11.2000 and actual benefits with effect from 1.3.2007 with all consequential benefits with retrospective effect from the same dates. The respondents are further directed to issue the pay slip in the revised scale to the petitioners. The aforesaid exercise be implemented positively within a period of three months from the date of communication of the order.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that even when the order passed by this Court in W.P.(S) No. 799 of 2009 was not complied with and no pay slips in the upgraded scale were issued in favour of the petitioners of that writ petition, Cont. Case (Civil) No. 392 of 2018 was filed and thereafter only the order was complied with by the respondent-State by issuance of Resolution No. 2553 dated 26.9.2019. 5. Case (Civil) No. 392 of 2018 was filed and thereafter only the order was complied with by the respondent-State by issuance of Resolution No. 2553 dated 26.9.2019. 5. Learned counsel further submits that in another similar matter, one Hirday Kumar also moved this Court in W.P.(S) No. 4006 of 2008, and the same was also allowed. Thereafter the respondent-State challenged the said order passed by the writ Court before the Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 61 of 2010 and the same was also dismissed by order dated 30.9.2010. The respondent-State thereafter went to the Hon’ble Apex Court of India in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) CC No. 4461/2011, which was also dismissed in one line order. 6. Learned counsel submits that said Brahma Nath Sharma, Digvijay Mani Tripathi, who were petitioners in W.P.(S) No. 799 of 2009 and Hriday Kumar, who was petitioner in W.P(S) No. 4006 of 2008, are the members of Jharkhand Prosecution Service Association. Learned counsel argues that in view of the Notification dated 17.12.2007 and in the light of the orders and directions passed by this Court, affirmed up to the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, the members of petitioner, who are Assistant Public Prosecutors, Additional Public Prosecutors and Public Prosecutors, are also entitled for the pay scale of Rs.8000-13500/-as per 5th Pay Revision, like other State Services employees as per the Government Resolution dated 17.12.2007, notionally with effect from 15.11.2000 and actual benefits with effect from 01.03.2007 with all consequential benefits. 7. Learned counsel further submits that considering the aforesaid judgments, recently this Court in W.P.(S) No. 2721 of 2020 has been pleased to direct the respondent State to treat the members of Jharkhand Prosecution Service at par with State Services employees and grant benefit accordingly. 8. Learned Addl. Advocate General-IV, representing the State, very fairly submits that issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the order / judgment passed by this Court in W.P.(S) No. 799 of 2009 (Brahma Nath Sharma & Another Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.) 9. 8. Learned Addl. Advocate General-IV, representing the State, very fairly submits that issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the order / judgment passed by this Court in W.P.(S) No. 799 of 2009 (Brahma Nath Sharma & Another Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.) 9. Be that as it may, having gone through the submissions of the parties and upon perusal of the records of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the issue involved in this writ petition is no more res interga and the same has been decided by this Court in the case of Brahma Nath Sharma & Another (supra) and Hriday Kumar (supra), affirmed up to the Hon’ble Apex Court. In such circumstances, I hereby direct the respondents-authorities to verify the factual aspects/ issues involved in the present writ petition vis-à-vis factual aspects/ issues involved in W.P.(S) No. 799 of 2009 and W.P.(S) No. 4006 of 2008 and if the facts/ issues involved in the present writ petitions are found to be similar to the aforementioned writ petitions, respondent State is directed to grant and sanction the pay scale of Rs.8000/-13500/- to the petitioners herein also as per 5th Pay Revision, like other State Services employees in view of Government Resolution No. 3589 dated 17.12.2007 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) in accordance with law and consequently, issue pay slip in the revised scale to the petitioners. Let the entire exercises be completed positively within a period of three months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. 10. With the aforesaid observations and directions, both these writ petitions stand allowed.