JUDGMENT : Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J. 1. Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. J.F. Toppo, learned S.C. (L&C)-III for the respondents. 2. On 1st August, 2019 counsels appearing for the State of Bihar and State of Jharkhand took time to examine the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Rajni Kant Ojha Vs. State of Bihar passed in Civil Appeal No. 7147 of 2008. 3. Today, when the matter was taken up learned counsel appearing for the State of Jharkhand submits that the matter can be disposed of with a direction to the authorities concerned to examine the case of the petitioner in the light of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Rajni Kant Ojha (supra). 4. The matter relates to gradation list/seniority list of the petitioners in the cadre of Supply Inspector. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners have joined earlier than the respondents in Government Services and have rendered almost 20 years officiating in the cadre of Supply Inspection from the year 1985 and the private respondents joined the cadre of the Assistant Consolidation Officer much later than the petitioners and they were adjusted to the cadre of Supply Inspectors after the post of Assistant Consolidation Officer was abolished and they were declared surplus staff and at the time of their joining to the cadre of the Supply Inspector, they were given fresh appointment in the cadre of Supply Inspector with a clear stipulation that their seniority will be counted from the date of joining to the cadre of Supply Inspector. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in view of the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajni Kant Ojha (supra) the dispute has been set at rest. Accordingly, he filed I.A. No. 1473 of 2018 for deleting the name of the respondent no. 3 to 47 which was allowed by order dated 13.04.2018. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajni Kant Ojha (supra) held that “The State Government is directed to re-determine the seniority of the appellants and the private respondents based on "... the date of joining on the post of Supply Inspectors...". 3 to 47 which was allowed by order dated 13.04.2018. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajni Kant Ojha (supra) held that “The State Government is directed to re-determine the seniority of the appellants and the private respondents based on "... the date of joining on the post of Supply Inspectors...". It was also observed in that order “that the private respondents will not be entitled to seniority from the date of joining on the post of Assistant Consolidation Officers will not create claim for seniority in the cadre of Supply Inspectors". The private respondents would therefore, not be entitled to the benefit of their position in the merit list, prepared by the BSSSB, based on which they were appointed as Assistant Consolidation Officers. 6. The present writ is also disposed of in the light of the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Rajni Kant Ojha (supra). The petitioners are directed to file a fresh representation before the authorities concerned. The authorities in turn will take final call on the representation of the petitioners within a period of six weeks’ from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order. It goes without saying that the authorities will minutely examine the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajni Kant Ojha (Supra) and pass reasoned order in accordance with law. 7. If they come on conclusion that the case of the petitioners are fully covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of Rajni Kant Ojha (supra) they will act in the light of the order, so that the fruit of the order may come to the petitioners. 8. In view of the above directions and observations, the writ petition stands allowed and disposed of.