Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.—The petitioners 13 in number claim that they were appointed as Dalpatis in respective Gram Panchayats before 1993 and they are continuing to hold the said post. They rely on a State Government decision as contained in memo no. 5448 dated 24.06.1989 whereby those Dalpatis who were trained and having matriculation qualification with experience of two either before or after the training could be appointed on the post of Panchayat Sewak. It is their further case that in 2001, the State Government came out with another decision to fill up the post of Panchayat Sewak, which was designated as Panchayat Secretary, by way of deputation. Subsequently, the State Government introduced an amendment in its policy decision of 2001 through memo no. 2157 dated 15.07.2003 to the effect that appointment against the post of Panchayat Sewak shall be made only on the recommendation of Bihar Staff Selection Commission constituted under Bihar Staff Selection Commission Act, 2002 in accordance with Bihar Staff Selection Commission Rules, 2003, Schedule 1 Item Kha (4). The petitioners’ claim that for the purpose of filling up of the post of Panchayat Sewak by those working as Dalpatis, a gradation list was prepared. It has been stated in paragraph 11 of the writ petition that appointment of Dalpati as Panchayat Sewak is by way of promotion and the petitioners are entitled to such promotion. It is their further case that in the light of the State Government policy, as contained in memo no. 2815 dated 11.06.2008, post of Panchayat Secretary was to be filled up from amongst Dalpatis who were in service and based on their respective seniority, they are entitled for their appointment as Panchayat Secretary. Nine out of thirteen petitioners had earlier approached this Court by filing C.W.J.C. No. 346 of 2017, which was disposed of by an order dated 03.03.2017 in following terms:—

“Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, informs that all these petitioners come within the zone of consideration. He also refers to the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of State of Bihar & ors. vs. Subhash Chandra Shukla & ors., reported in 2009(4) PLJR 569 and a Bench decision of this Court rendered in the case of Paspat Singh vs. the State of Bihar & ors., arising from C.W.J.C.No. 12605/2006, to submit that similar issues having been raised, the respondent District Magistrate was directed to do the needful. However, even while espousing the cause of the petitioners Mr. Roy has failed to satisfy this Court whether any such claim has been raised by the petitioners before the authority concerned, in the light of the judgments relied upon by the learned counsel. In the circumstances discussed, the writ petition is disposed of with the liberty to the petitioners to raise their claim before the District Magistrate, Muzaffarpur or the authority concerned and it goes without saying that any such claim being raised, the authority concerned shall dispose of the claim of the petitioners in accordance with law expeditiously and preferably within three months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order.”

2. In compliance of the said order, the District Magistrate has passed an order dated 24.07.2017 whereby claim of the petitioners for their appointment as Panchayat Secretaries has been rejected, which is under challenge in the present writ application.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. It is the case of the respondents State of Bihar on the other hand that under Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 there was a post of Panchayat Sewak which Act was repealed and replaced by the Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 enacted in consonance with the provisions of Article 243B of the Constitution of India The 1993 Act does not contemplate any post of Panchayat Sewak rather it provides for post of Panchayat Secretary for each Gram Panchayat. The 1993 Act was also subsequently repealed and has been