IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2467 of 2011 1. RAJESH PRASAD son of Sri Basudeo Sah, resident of Vill.-Mirpur, P.S.- Dighwara, Distt.-Saran 2. Arbind Kumar son of Sri Ramesh Nandan Prasad, resident of vill. + Post- Bathanaha, Distt.-Sitamarhi 3. Mahesh Kumar son of Sri Shionandan Sah, resident of vill.-Chakdaulat, P.O.- Lakhanpura, Distt.-Patna 4. Ajit Kumar sons of late Shivnandan, Pandit, resident of vill.-Radhil, P.O.- Naima, P.S.-Ekangarsarai, Distt.-Patna. 5. Anil Kumar Ram son of late Sahadeo Ram, resident of vill.-Malkhachak, P.O.+ P.S.-Dighwara, Distt.-Saran(Chapra). 6. Bechan Thakur, son of Sri Baidyanath Thakur, resident of vill.+P.O.-Bango, Thakurpati(Dihali Bangla), P.S.-Bangao, Distt.-Sssharsa------------Petitioners. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Principal Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 4. Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 5. Principal Secretary, Agriculture Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 6. The Director, Intigrated Child Development Services (ICDS), Indira Bhawan, Boring Canal Road, Patna. 7. Bihar Public Service Commission through its Chairman, Patna. 8. Chairman, Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna. 9. Secretary, Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna. ------------Respondents. ----------- 2. 9.2.2011 The grievance of the petitioners is that they were appointed as Statistical Assistants on contractual basis in consolidated pay of Rs.7000/- per month under I.C.D.S. Directorate (Social Welfare Department) but the respondent- authorities are not recommending their names for regular appointment in admissible pay scale. It is also their grievance that juniors to them in the merit list of the Competitive Examination of 3rd Graduate Level, held by B.P.S.C. in the year 1995 have been recommended by the respondents for regular appointment. In this regard petitioners have filed several representations, which are annexed as Annexure-3 series to this writ application, but those remained unanswered. 2 Having heard counsel for the parties, it would suffice if a direction is given to the respondent-authorities to consider and dispose of the representations (Annexure-3 series) filed by the petitioners in accordance with law preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. This Court orders accordingly. With the aforesaid observation/direction this writ petition is disposed of. Sudip ( T. Meena Kumari, J.)