CWP 7328/2010 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH SB Civil Writ Petition No.7328/2010 Rajendra Prasad Sharma & anr. Vs. State of Raj. & ors. DATE OF ORDER : 25/08/2010 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Mr. JK Agarwal, for petitioners. Counsel submits that both the petitioners are discharging duties of the post of Store Mushi and Anx.2 clearly depicts about their working on the said post but still the respondents have not taken note of the post of which duties the petitioners are discharging while taking decision for grant of semi-permanent status vide order dt. 15/04/2007. Counsel submits that the petitioners were entitled to be considered for grant of semi- permanent status not on the post on which they were appointed but on the post of which duties were being discharged by them under Rule 3(3) of the Work Charge Service Rules, 1964 and their nature of duties has not been looked into or considered by the respondents while granting semi-permanent status while passing the order Anx. 1 dt. 15/04/2007. Without going into the controversy any further, this Court considers it appropriate to direct the petitioners to make representation before the authority competent with regard to the CWP 7328/2010 [2] grievance made by them in the instant writ petition by enclosing all the documentary evidence in support thereof which may show that the petitioners have worked and discharged duties on the post of Store Munshi and if such representation is made, the respondents are expected to examine their record and pass speaking order taking into consideration Rule 3 (3) of the Work Charge Service Rules, 1964 within a period of two months thereafter. If either of the petitioner is still aggrieved by the communication made, will be free to avail remedy available under law. With these directions/observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. [AJAY RASTOGI], J. Raghu-7328-CW-2010-final.doc