IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13031 of 2003 SHASHI KUMAR SHARMA & ANR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 04 05.02.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. This order shall take into consideration facts and materials only to the extent necessary for adjudication at this stage so as not to prejudice the petitioners in any manner, in the nature of the order proposed to be passed. The District Industries Centres run by the State Government with central aid also, were partially run directly by the State Government, while the District Industries Centre (hereinafter called D.I.C.) at Darbhanga, Muzaffarpur and Gaya were run by N.G.O‟s., but controlled and financed by the State Government. The winding up of these three D.I.C‟s run by the N.G.O‟s. and the consequent loss of jobs led to the institution of C.W.J.C. No. 3712, 3066 and 2410 of 1994 by them. A Bench of this Court noticing that discrimination was being caused against the petitioners, who were working in the D.I.C‟s. being run by the N.G.O. at Muzaffarpur, while those in 2 the Darbhanga D.I.C‟s. had been absorbed/ gave directions for absorption. Consequently the State Government issued formal orders on 3.3.2003 absorbing them in Government service with effect from 28.2.1994, the date on which their services were terminated. The bone of contention in this writ petition is the loss of opportunity for the petitioners for computation of their services from the original engagement as pensionable because of the date from which they are being absorbed i.e. 28.02.1994. Learned counsel for the petitioners urges that once a finding of discrimination has been arrived at, the petitioners propose to represent before the authorities relying upon what is termed as “the hardship rule” to give appropriate relaxation to them, as allegedly they are falling short of pensionable service only by a few months. That is a matter to be considered by the respondents in their wisdom but in accordance with law. Any such representation of the petitioners invoking the „hardship rule‟, in the facts and circumstances of the case, is required to be disposed of by a reasoned and speaking order 3 within a maximum period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Other issues, though raised during course of argument, were finally not pressed. The application stands disposed. P.K. (Navin Sinha, J.)