IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7352 of 2009 1. SUBODH KUMAR JHA SON OF VISHWANATH JHA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND P.O. DHIGHRI, P.S. KATIHAR, DISTRICT KATIHAR. 2. RAVI SHANKAR SHARMA SON OF RAMJEE SHARMA, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA GANDHI NAGAR, P.S. AND P.O. KATIHAR, DISTRICT KATIHAR. 3. GOPAL KUMAR SON OF LATE RAS MOHAN MANDAL, RESIDENT OF MOHALL PROFESSOR COLONY DURGA ASTHAN, P.S. KATIHAR, DISTRICT KATIHAR. 4. BIRENDRA KUMAR SON OF SHANKAR SAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE DEDHUA, P.S. SUKKI, DISTRICT VAISHALI. 5. SHEELA YADAV WIFE OF SRI LALA BRAJ NANDAN PRASAD, RESIDENT OF V/ 466, VIDHYAPURI, P.S. KANKARBAGH, DISTRICT PATNA. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY GOVT. OF BIHAR, OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, GOVT. OF BIHAR, OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 3. THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS, GOVT. OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 4. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND LAND REFORMS, GOVT. OF BIHAR, NEW SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 5. THE COMMISSIONER PURNIA DIVISION, PURNIA. 6. THE COLLECTOR CUM DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KATIHAR. ----------- 2/ 02-07-2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. Petitioners were appointed pursuant to the advertisement No.48/98, which was for the Katihar district, issued by the Bihar Public Service Commission on 26.01.1998. They have filed this writ application for a direction to the State respondents to consider their case for grant of revised pay scale of Rs. 4000-6000, as according to them other similarly situate persons had approached this Court in C.W.J.C. No.13577 of 2006 for similar relief, which was allowed under order dated 17.12.2007, Annexure-6 to this application, against which the State respondents preferred L.P.A. No. 522 of 2008, which was also - 2 - dismissed under order dated 29.09.2008, Annexure-6/1 to this application. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that their case is also covered by the aforesaid two orders dated 17.12.2007 and 29.09.2008, Annexures 6 and 6/1. Let the District Magistrate, Katihar consider the representation of the petitioners, as contained in Annexure-7 to this application in the light of the aforesaid two orders dated 17.12.2007 and 29.09.2008, Annexure- 6 and 6/1 and pass appropriate reasoned order in accordance with law as early as possible, in any case within two months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. In the event, representation is allowed, it goes without saying that petitioners be allowed the consequential benefit. This application is, accordingly, disposed of. BTiwary/ ( V. N. Sinha, J )