Heard Sri N.Subba Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners in C.M.A.Nos.1210 of 2001, 335 of 2002, 550 of 2002, 1685 of 2002 2274 of 2001, 3406 of 2002 and 2197 of 2003, Smt. A.Malathi, learned counsel for the petitioner in C.M.A.No.2380 of 2002, Sri T.S. Rayalu, learned counsel for the petitioner in C.M.A.No.856 of 2001 and Sri T.Ramulu, learned counsel for the respondents in C.M.A.Nos.1210 of 2001, Smt. V.Sujatha, learned counsel for the respondent in C.M.A.No.335 of 2002, Smt. M. Seetha Devi, learned counsel for the respondent in C.M.A.No.550 of 2002, Sri A.V.K.S. Prasad, learned counsel for the respondent in C.M.A.No.856 of 2001 and 1685 of 2002, Sri R.Venkat Rao, learned counsel for the respondents in C.M.A.No.2274 of 2001, Sri J.Janakirami Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent in C.M.A.No.2380 of 2002, B.Devanand, learned counsel for the respondent in C.M.A.No.3406 of 2002 and Sri Srinivasa Rao Vutla, learned counsel for the respondent in C.M.A.No.2197 of 2003.

2. In all these cases, a common question of law arises for consideration and so they are being disposed of by a common order with the consent of the counsel for both sides.

3. The question which arises fo