S. K. Mookherjee, J.: These Twelve appeals have been referred to 'the Full Bench in terms of Rule 1, Chapter VII of Part II of the Appellate Side Rules, as the referring Bench found itself unable to agree with the views of the earlier Division Bench of this Court. The point on which the difference arose related to the necessity of personal service of a mandatory order as distinct from prohibitory order. In the order of reference, the Division Bench, however, took note of an admitted factual position that the order, in the present case, was not personally served upon the contemnors, though they knew and were fully aware of the said order and took all possible legal and administrative steps to have the said order set aside and/or to make it infructuous. Since all the appeals have been referred to us, all points, including the above noted admitted factual position, have been treated as open for arguments by us.

2. The origin of the entire dispute may be traced to a notification issued by the State Government, dated 23rd February, 1983, whereby the employees of different Universities of West Bengal were proposed to be granted further additional dearness allowance like their coun