Ashutosh Kumar, J. – The petitioners, who are seventeen in number, have approached this Court for a direction to the respondent authorities for regularization of their services in permanent establishment of the Government and be given consequential benefits of such regularization. 2. The claims of the petitioners, as has been submitted on behalf of the State, have been rejected on the ground that they are not daily-wagers, but are seasonal employees and have worked for the organization only for 4 – 5 months in a year. 3. The aforesaid statement made on behalf of the State is being disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, who submits that some of the petitioners are daily-wagers and in support of which they are ready to furnish documents, suggesting that they are serving for the last more than ten years on muster roll and are being paid for the same as well. 4. The petitioners have also tried to canvass before this Court that earlier also, a Bench of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 6805 of 2014 had permitted the petitioners therein to approach the authorities concerned for consideration of their cases for regularization. It has further been submitted that the claims of the petitioners for regularization was never rejected by the respondent authorities. 5. The law with regard to regularization has now been well settled in view of the decision in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and Ors. vs. Umadevi (3) and Ors. [ (2006) 4 SCC 1 ] and has further been clarified by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Ram Sevak Yadav vs. The State of Bihar and Ors., reported in 2013 (1) PLJR 964 . 6. A daily-wager does not have any right of claiming regularization. 7. Be that as it may, considering the status of the petitioners and the fact that some of the similarly situated persons, who were working as daily-wagers, have been regularized by the respondent authorities, this Court can only direct the petitioners to make a representation before the concerned authority, who, after checking up the records, would be under an obligation to dispose of such representation within a reasonable period of time preferably withn a period of six weeks from the date of representation by the petitioners. The representation in this regard be positively filed within a period of four weeks from today. 8. The representation in this regard be positively filed within a period of four weeks from today. 8. With the aforesaid observation, the present writ petition is disposed off.