liwaker jt.Petition (S) No. of 200S Mahesti Kumar Devanaan, S/o- Shrl Shankar Lal Devangan, Aged about 45 years, Presently working as Chowkidar in Govt. Pharmacv, Raipur, Chhattisaarh Avurvsdlc 2. Ashok Kumar Dhruv, S/o Shri Sahnik Ram, Aged about 38 years, Presently working as Medicine Maker in Govt. Ayurvedic Pharmacy, 3. Chamarin Ba; Banjare, W/o- Late Mangtu Ram, Aged about 50 years, Presentiv workina as Medicine Maker in Govt. Ayurvedic Pharmacy, Ralour, Chhattisaarh Mohan Lai Bharyaj, S/o Late Bhakhalu Ram, Aged about 36 vears, Presentlv workina as Medicine Maker in . Govl. Ayurvedic Pharmachy, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5. Brijtai Banjare; S/o- Shri Manrakhan La! Banjare, Aged about 40 years, Presenfy working as Medicine Maker in Govt. Ayurv'edic Pharmacy, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 6. Pawan Kumar Mahanand, S/o- Late Kishan Lai Mahanand, Aged about 45 years; Presently working as Sweeper in Govt. Ayurv'edic Pharmacy, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 7. Ashok Kumar Bharti, S/o- Shri Chakrapadi Bharti, Aged about 43 years, Presently working as Sweeper in Govt. Ayurvsdie Pharmacy, RaiDur, Chhattisaarh Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Sscratary", Dspartmcnt of Hsaith snd Family Weifare, D.K.S. Mantraiaya, Raipur (C.G.) t 2. Dii and Homeopathy, Chhattisaarh. dical Treatmenl Ralpur, 3. Superintendent, Govt. Ayurvedic Pharmacy, Ralpur Chhattlsgarh. 4. Deputy Director, Govt. Ayurvedic Pharmacy, Raipur, Chhattisgarh Shri Pankaj Shrivastava, counsel for the petitioners. Shri Vivek Sharam, PL for the State/ respondents. CONSTSTUTION F iNDIA (15.05.2009) With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard final!y. Petitioners are aggrieved by in action on the part of the respondents/State Authority whereby they are not passing any order in respect of reaularization of the services of the petitioners. Counsel for the petitioners submits that they were appolnted by Speciat Recruitment Drive on various grounds. He further submits that on 22.6.2008 a Committee has already been constituted by the State Government for considering such cases and therefore the Special Committee is being directed to consider the case of the petitioners and decide the same in accordance with law. Counsel for the State submits that he has no objection if a direction is issued for deciding t'ne representation of the petitioners. Petitioners are directed to make a tresh representation wlt'nin three weeks from the date the receipt of copy of this order and the respondent No. 1/State Authority in turn is directed to consider such representation within six weeks from the date of the said representation !t is made clear that Shis court. has not expressed any opinion upon the merits of the case and the competent authority would be directed to decide the representation strictly in accordance with law. With the above observation, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- pritinkerDiwakar Judge <•..