Judgment 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. The grievance of the petitioners is that despite direction of this court issued in C.W.J.C. No. 4011 of 1997, the cases of the petitioners have not been considered in the light of the observations made by this court. 3. It appears that the petitioners were appointed in 1993 on the post of Cooks in the residential hostels meant for the students of scheduled caste at Darbhanga and Madhubani as recommended by the employment exchange. They continued in services and in the year 1996 they were terminated on the ground that the Regional Deputy Director, Welfare had no jurisdiction to appoint them on the post of Cooks against a scale of Rs. 800-1150. Against the order of termination, petitioners approached this court in C.W.J.C. No. 4011 of 1997 which was disposed of by order as contained in Annexure 9 directing the authorities to re-consider the matter and if the sanctioned posts were there, to advertise the same. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that pursuant to the direction of this court as referred to above, the case of the petitioners and others was considered but they were not taken back into employment vide order as contained in Annexure 1. Learned counsel further submitted that five sanctioned posts of cooks are lying vacant under the respondents till date and since the petitioners had worked for a considerable period as cooks they could have been allowed to continue as against the vacant sanctioned posts. 5. The fact that the sanctioned posts of cooks are lying vacant, is not in dispute as per the statements made in the counter affidavit. It is the admitted fact according to the counter affidavit that five sanctioned posts of cooks are lying vacant under the respondents but the same would be filled up by issuing fresh advertisement. 6. From the materials on record, it appears that this court while disposing of the earlier writ application of the petitioners intended to direct the authorities to reconsider the cases of the petitioners on availability of posts. The authorities, some how or the other, though considered the case of the petitioners but did not allow them to continue on the posts of cooks and at the same time the sanctioned posts of cooks were not advertised. 7. The authorities, some how or the other, though considered the case of the petitioners but did not allow them to continue on the posts of cooks and at the same time the sanctioned posts of cooks were not advertised. 7. At this juncture, learned G.P. 6 submits that the sanctioned posts of cooks which are lying vacant, would be advertised in accordance with law. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court directs the respondents concerned to advertise the vacant sanctioned posts of cooks as referred to above forthwith inviting the applications from the eligible candidates and in case the petitioners also apply, their cases would be considered after giving them weightage as they had worked as cooks under the respondents against the sanctioned vacant posts for some time. In case the petitioners would be overage, they would be given age relaxation in accordance with law by the authorities concerned. This process, however, must be completed within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 9. With the aforesaid observation/direction, this application is disposed of.