JUDGMENT : Through Video Conferencing Heard Mr. Aashish Kumar Thakur, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. 2. Heard Mr. Jayant Franklin Toppo, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents-state. 3. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs : “For issuance of direction upon the respondent authorities to absorb the petitioners on permanent basis and to regularize their services on the class IV posts on which they are working from the date of their initial appointment on the sanctioned and vacant post, for several years, considering the order dated 27.11.1999 and its modified order dated 16.12.1999 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 2338/1998(R), order dated 18.09.2013 passed in W.P. (S) No. 7386 of 2012 and order dated 08.10.2018 passed in W.P. (S) No. 1951 of 2016 For issuance of direction upon the respondent authorities to treat the petitioners in service considering the fact that no termination order served upon them till date. They are still reporting their duties regularly to the concerned respondents. For issuance of direction upon the respondent authorities to make payment of their salary, which are being paid to the regular employees of the Road Construction Department from the date of initial appointment.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in the year 1988, a new mechanical circle/ division/sub division for extension and unification of mechanical organization of road construction department was created. In the year 1984, there was a government circular that no appointment under work charge establishment should be made and those work charge employees appointed till 1984 to be absorbed. In such circumstances, petitioners were engaged during the period from 1995 to 1997 on daily wages on sanctioned vacant post and continued to work. Learned counsel submits that more than 3281 posts were lying vacant in the Road Construction Department which is apparent from the order passed by this court in CWJC No. 2338 of 1998 (Etwa Oraon and Others versus State of Bihar and others) para-8. Learned counsel further submits that in the year 1997, for the purposes of regular appointment, posts were advertised in the daily newspaper Hindustan on 22.01.1997 and the petitioners applied for appointment on the said post. However, the respondent did not proceed further pursuant to the advertisement. Learned counsel further submits that in the year 1997, for the purposes of regular appointment, posts were advertised in the daily newspaper Hindustan on 22.01.1997 and the petitioners applied for appointment on the said post. However, the respondent did not proceed further pursuant to the advertisement. Learned counsel further submits that a number of writ petitions were filed before this court for consideration of regularization of the various persons who are similarly situated as that of the petitioners and orders were passed for filling up the posts by advertisement. He refers to the order dated 27.11.1999 passed in CWJC No, 2338 of 1998 (R) and submits that the writ petition was itself disposed of directing the respondents including the State of Bihar to take necessary steps to filling up the post lying vacant in the road construction department and taking judicial notice of the fact that the roads of the entire state were found in dilapidated condition. The respondents were directed to fill up the vacant posts lying vacant in the department as early as possible preferably within a period of six months, if there is no other legal impediment. The learned counsel submits that in spite of such order passed long back the posts are still vacant and therefore the present writ petition has been filed. The learned counsel submits that the petitioners have filed representation before the Chief Engineer, Mechanical, Road Construction Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi as back as in the year 2017, but the same is still pending for consideration. 5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents on the other hand has submitted that party position has not been properly made in the present case and the respondent No. 5 and 6 are not the concerned respondents. However, he submits that a counter affidavit has been filed by respondent No. 2, 3 and 4. The learned counsel has referred to para 11 of the counter affidavit to submit that in the year between 1994-95 altogether 883 persons were appointed in the class-III and class-IV on temporary basis and provisionally that too without following the due procedure of appointment and accordingly by letter dated 29.08.1998 their services were found illegal and were terminated. The learned counsel has referred to para 11 of the counter affidavit to submit that in the year between 1994-95 altogether 883 persons were appointed in the class-III and class-IV on temporary basis and provisionally that too without following the due procedure of appointment and accordingly by letter dated 29.08.1998 their services were found illegal and were terminated. The said termination was challenged in CWJC No. 2338 of 1998 which was disposed of on 27.11.99 observing that the petitioners therein were appointed without following the procedure of recruitment rules and there was no legal right accrued to the petitioners to continue in the services. He also submits that the order dated 16.12.99 passed in the aforesaid case modified the order dated 27.11.99 to the extent that while filling the vacant posts, respondents shall consider the case of petitioners therein by giving relaxation in their age. Learned counsel submits that thereafter a panel was prepared against 103 vacancies and from the petitioners of CWJC No. 2338 of 1998 (R), 23 candidates were appointed against 103 vacancies in accordance with prevalent rules and regulations and the same has already been exhausted in the year 2006 and the panel prepared in the year 2006 has got no force. Learned counsel submits that since in the year 2006, the panel has already elapsed, all the processes have been exhausted and this is apparent from letter No. 8145 dated 03.12.2015. The learned counsel has also referred to memo No. 837 dated 06.02.2019 issued by Secretary, Road Construction Department, modifying clause-12 of the order No. 8145 dated 03.12.2015. 6. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that although the respondents are contesting the claim of the petitioners, but since no order has been passed qua the petitioners, therefore the writ petition can be disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to approach the Secretary, Road Construction Department who may take a call and pass an appropriate order in the light of the present policy or rules of the state government and the authority may also consider Annexure-B and Annexure-C of the counter affidavit filed in this case while passing the order. 7. 7. Considering the aforesaid submissions and the fact that the petitioners had filed their representation to the Chief Engineer, (Mechanical) instead of Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand, the present writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to approach the Secretary, Road Construction Department, by filing a detailed representation within a period of one month from today for the redressal of their grievances. If such representation is filed within the aforesaid period, the Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand is directed to grant an opportunity of hearing to one authorized person representing all the petitioners and pass a reasoned order as per the policy/rules/law applicable to the petitioners. The reasoned order should be passed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of representation and be also communicated through speed post at the address which may be specifically mentioned in the representation to be filed by the petitioners. 8. With the aforesaid observation and directions, this writ petition is disposed of. 9. Pending I.A., if any, stands closed.