IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5024 of 2002 RAJ NARAYAN ROY, S/O BINDA ROY, R/O SAHBAJPUR, P.O.-MUBARAKPUR, P.S.-MARHOURA, DISTRICT-SARAN (CHAPRA). ……………PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. DIRECTOR, DESHI CHIKITSHA, HEALTH DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 3. ZILA DESHI CHIKITSHA PADADHIKARI, BHOJPUR, ARA. 4. THE MEDICAL OFFICER, RAJKIYA HOMEOPATHIC AUSDHALAYA PURHARA, P.O.+P.S.-PURHARA, DISTRICT-BHOJPUR. …………………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 4 03.03.2010 On the basis of Annexure-1 petitioner claims to have been appointed as Night Guard on daily wages on 15.5.1983 (he claims that he worked against class-III post in different capacity including compounder). It has been claimed that he is still continuing in service. In this writ application he prayed for his absorption against class-III post. In view of the judgment of the Constitution Bench in the case of State of Karnataka Vs. Uma Devi (3) it is difficult for this Court to hold that the petitioner is fit for absorption. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that one Sri Washi Haider has been regularized on class-IV post which is evident from Annexure-2. He submits that the 2 case of the petitioner is identical to said Sri Washi Haider and, therefore, the petitioner’s case may be considered by the respondents for equal treatment. He submits that the petitioner has already filed a representation before the respondents vide Annexure-8 for his regularization. He also submits that the petitioner will file another representation specifically referring to the case of said Sri Washi Haider claiming for equal treatment. The petitioner will be at liberty to do so. In case the petitioner files a fresh representation the respondents shall consider the case of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With the above observations and directions this writ application is disposed of. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion in respect of the merit of the claim of the petitioner. Arvind/ (J. N. Singh, J.)