IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1557 of 2006 SUNIL MAHTO Versus THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS With CWJC No.2268 of 2006 ABHIMANYU RAM Versus THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS with CWJC No.2138 of 2006 SANOJ KUMAR Versus THE UNION OF INDIA & ORS ----------- 3 30.7.2008 Heard learned counsel for the parties. In all these cases petitioners are seeking regularization as well as conferment of temporary status based on the length of service rendered by them under the department and also in terms of the regularization policy laid down by the Central Government in this regard. The grievance of these petitioners are that juniors to them have been accommodated but their cases has not been considered by the competent authority for many a reason. Irrespective the various averments when the petitioners are willing to produce the basic evidence in support of their claim which is verifiable then there is no reason why their cases should not be considered in the light of the policy laid down by the Central Government from time to time. Keeping a silence on the issue more so when discrimination is being alleged cannot help the respondents much less the petitioners. The Court grants liberty to petitioners to file - 2 - application along with supporting evidence of their work of the various period which they are claiming and same shall be considered by respondent no.1 i.e. Principal General Manager (BSNL) Telephone Bhawan, Patna. An order should be passed within a period of four months from the date of filing of such application by these petitioners. These writ applications stand disposed of with the above direction and liberty. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)