THE ROHTAS DISTRICT NON - FORMAL EDUCATION INSTRUCTOR ASSOCIATION Vs. SHEO BHAJAN PRASAD DIWAKAR & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these applications seeking review arise from the judgment and order of this Court dated 11.08.2015, passed in L.P.A. No. 1489 of 2011.

(2.) It may be noted that this order has not been interfered with by the Apex Court which has only clarified that the benefit of the order would be available only to people who were party to the proceedings or were intervenors or connected therewith. According to the State as well as the petitioners the confusion arises from what has been noted by us in paragraph 10 of the judgment, which is quoted hereunder :

(3.) Sri Binod Kanth, learned Senior Counsel submits that confusion is with regard to expression three years continuously, at the time when the non -formal education scheme was abolished, in which they were. According to him the non -formal scheme in which the petitioners and their like were working were in fact stopped starting with 1995 ending with 1998, different dates for different areas. There was a new scheme for a different scheme which continued thereafter known as 'Special Education Scheme', which in fact, came to an end in 2001. The petitioners and their like, therefore, stopped working as Instructors in the non -formal education scheme in between the period 1995 to 1998 and none of them continued up to 2001, much less as non -formal education Instructors. The State relying upon the observation, as made by the learned Single Judge from which the appeal arose, points out that the learned Single Judge had observed thus :