Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:3347 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 597 of 2025 Petitioner :- Diwakar Singh And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Medical Health And Family Welfare And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Alok Mishra,Priyanshu Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Alok Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Standing counsel for the respondents. 2. It has been submitted that the petitioners are working on contract basis on the post of x-ray technicians and have also participated for regular selection on the same post. It has been submitted that the recruitment process is still underway and the State Government in compliance with the directions of this Court in number of petitions including writ A No.4937 of 2023 has amended the Uttar Pradesh X-ray Technicians Service Rules, 1986 and by the amended Rule 15 the procedure for recruitment has also been amended and as far as the petitioners are concerned it has been submitted that in Rule 15 sub clause 2 has been inserted which provides for weightage of marks to persons working as x-ray technicians on contract basis in Medical and Health Department and they shall be awarded three marks for each completed years of service on contract basis subject to a maximum of 15 marks. It has further been stated in the note which is amended to the said Rule that the said benefit is of one time assistance and shall not be extended in future. It has been stated that the petitioners apprehend that the benefit of the said rule shall not be given to them and have accordingly preferred a representation to the opposite parties on 13.1.2025 with prayer to grant them the benefit of the amended Uttar Pradesh X-Ray Technician Services (1st Amendment) Rule, 2024. 3. Learned Standing counsel, on the other hand, has opposed the writ petition and submits that it is only mere apprehension of the petitioners that has led them to approach this Court by filing present writ petition. It is stated that no order has yet been passed nor any decision taken or communicated to the petitioners pertaining to the fact that they would not be granted the benefit of the amended rules. He submits that on mere apprehension writ petition would not be maintainable. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners fairly submits that the grievance of the petitioners shall be substantially redressed in case the opposite parties are directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 13.1.2025, as contained in Annexure No.10 to the writ petition, expeditiously. 5. Learned State counsel does not oppose the aforesaid innocuous prayer of the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, without entering into merits of the controversy, respondent No.1 is directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 13.1.2025, as contained in Annexure No.10 to the writ petition, expeditiously, say within a period of three weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is placed before him by passing a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law. 7. With aforesaid observation and direction the writ petition stands disposed of. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 20.1.2025 RKM. Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench