ORDER : Satish Chandra Sharma, J. The present writ petitions are arising out of order dated 21-6-2019 passed in four original applications preferred by the Karnataka State Civil Police Officers being aggrieved by order dated 23-1-2016 passed by the State Government in terms of Regulation II (j) and (k) which provides for issuance of equivalency order. 2. The equivalency order has been issued by the State of Karnataka on 23-1-2016 holding the Assistant Commandants of Karnataka State Reserve Police as equivalent to Deputy Superintendent of Police (State Civil Police Services). The matter was heard by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru, (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) and judgment has been delivered which is running into 142 pages. The Tribunal has dismissed the original applications holding the validity of order dated 23-1-2016. However, for upholding the validity of order dated 23-1-2016, reference finds place only in paragraph No.23 mean thereby after writing 142 pages, only one paragraph deals with order dated 23-1-2016. 3. Paragraph Nos.23 to 26 of the order passed in the Original Applications reads as under: “23. Since the Hon'ble Apex Court has laid down the law on the subject, we hereby declare: a) The Karnataka Legislature has the jurisdiction and competence to enact and amend Section 3 of the Karnataka Police Act as it stands today. b) In consequence thereof there is only one police force in the State of Karnataka including the State Reserve Police Force established under Section 145. c) All the officers of Karnataka Police, in all streams of policing of the rank of Dy. SP and above with a minimum service of eight years and qualified as per the rules are eligible to be considered for promotion into the Indian Police Service. d) As ordered in WP. No.3269/2012 dtd.25.4.2013 by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka vide sub-para-vii of para-71 'the Government decision should contain the reasons either for granting equivalence or refusing to grant equivalence so that the aggrieved person could agitate his rights before this Court'. The order of the Govt. d) As ordered in WP. No.3269/2012 dtd.25.4.2013 by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka vide sub-para-vii of para-71 'the Government decision should contain the reasons either for granting equivalence or refusing to grant equivalence so that the aggrieved person could agitate his rights before this Court'. The order of the Govt. of Karnataka at AnnexureA27, GO No. DPAR 155 SPS 2013 dtd.23.01.2016 while ordering the inclusion of the Assistant Commandants of KSRP as equivalent to Civil Police Services for the purpose of promotion to Indian Police Service, does not contain any reason as ordered by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka for not ordering the equivalence of the other police service officers of the police force of the State of Karnataka. e) As already noted, as per Section 3 of the Karnataka Police Act, there is only one police force in the State of Karnataka and as such leaving out certain other categories without any valid reason by the Government vide impugned order is not correct. Therefore, there shall be a mandate to the Govt. of Karnataka to specify the reasons for not including the other police service officers for being eligible to be promoted to the Indian Police Service. The validity of order at Annexure-A27 is otherwise upheld. 24. We, however, make it clear that this equivalence as established by the statute shall only be extendable to the officers recruited into the various branches of the State Police Service based on their minimum qualifications and recruitment through a common standardised process. 25. In view of the various proceedings before this Tribunal as well as the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka and the decision taken by the Govt. of Karnataka vide order at AnnexureA27, it is clarified that the orders shall take effect only from the date of the impugned order. The OAs.No.355-359/2016, 362-364/2016, 365-377/2016 are disposed off as above. No costs. 26. Regarding OAs.No.631-635/2017, as stated by the respondents, the application is filed against the internal communications between the Government and the DG & IG of Police. The respondents have no other option except to follow the various orders and guidelines relating to the crucial date for inclusion in the select list etc., which are all well established. This they shall do accordingly and therefore these OAs stand dismissed.” 4. The respondents have no other option except to follow the various orders and guidelines relating to the crucial date for inclusion in the select list etc., which are all well established. This they shall do accordingly and therefore these OAs stand dismissed.” 4. Most unfortunate aspect of the case is that, there was no prayer for declaring other Police Services in the State of Karnataka as equivalent to the Karnataka Police Civil Services and in spite of aforesaid, direction has been given to treat all the Officers in Karnataka in the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police and above in all streams with a minimum service of eight years and qualified as per the rules are eligible to be considered for promotion into the post of Indian Police Service. The Tribunal has issued a mandamus to the State of Karnataka to consider Officers of other Police services in Karnataka also. The State of Karnataka has other four Police services. 5. In the considered opinion of this Court, the Tribunal should have gone in detail in respect of the impugned order dated 23-1-2016 and should have decided the matter on merits, after considering all rival contentions of the parties. The same has certainly not been done. With the consent of the parties, matter is being remanded back to the Tribunal to decide afresh in accordance with law that too after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties. There are certain interveners also in the present case and therefore, interveners are permitted to file intervention application before the Tribunal. 6. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioners has argued before this Court that the State is going to send a list of Deputy Superintendent of Police serving under Karnataka Civil Police and their interest is going to be hampered, if such a list is sent. 7. Learned Government Advocate has stated before this Court that for a period of thirty days, the entire process shall be kept in abeyance. 8. Resultantly, without averting into the merits of the case, the matter is remanded back to the Tribunal for deciding it afresh on merits in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 8-2-2021. No further notice is required as all parties are present before this Court and even, interveners are present. With the aforesaid directions, writ petitions stand disposed of. 9. Parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 8-2-2021. No further notice is required as all parties are present before this Court and even, interveners are present. With the aforesaid directions, writ petitions stand disposed of. 9. It is further made clear that the Tribunal will not grant any adjournment in the matter and the parties shall co-operate with the final hearing of the matter and in case, any necessity for grant of adjournment arises, the Tribunal shall record reasons for such an adjournment. 10. All pending interlocutory applications also stand disposed of. No order as to costs.