IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 194 OF 2006 DR. (MRS.) SHUBHANGI LOTLIKAR, ....Petitioner VASCO-DA-GAMA, GOA. Versus STATE OF GOA THROUGH THE CHIEF ....Respondents SECRETARY AND 3 ORS., Mr. S. D.Lotlikar, Senior Advocate with Mr. M.D'Souza, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. S. S. Kantak, Advocate General with Ms. R. Chodankar, Additional Government Advocate for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. A. N. S. Nadkarni, Advocate for the Respondent No.4. Coram:- DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN & N. A. BRITTO, JJ. Date:- 19th September, 2006 P.C.:- Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Advocate General for the respondent nos.1 and 2 and the learned Counsel for the respondent no.4. By this petition, the petitioner is basically challenging the Order dated 6-5-2003 whereby respondent no.3 is directed to hold charge. With regard to the same there is an affidavit-in-reply filed by the respondent nos.1 and 2 wherein it is clearly mentioned that the respondent no.3 is only functioning as Drawing and Disbursing Officer. The learned Advocate General also makes it clear that respondent no.3 is having no supervisory role over the petitioner. However, respondent no.3 addresses correspondence on behalf of the Administrative Medical Officer which post is still lying vacant and which will be filled up shortly. The learned Advocate General states that within a period of three months necessary proposal will be sent to respondent no.4/Goa Public Service Commission to make appropriate recommendations. The learned Counsel for the respondent no.4/Goa Public Service Commission states that within a period of three months thereafter recommendations will be made to the respondent no.1/Government of Goa to appoint a suitable person, in the post of Administrative Medical Officer. Accordingly this petition stands disposed of. DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. N. A. BRITTO, J. RD.