1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3046/92 R.C. Gupta vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of order : 4/1/2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Vijai Singh for the petitioner. Shri S.D. Khaspuria, Addl. Govt. Counsel for the respondents. ****** This writ petition was filed by petitioner R.C. Gupta way back in the year 1992 inter alia challenging the validity of substituted explanation below sub-rule 11(c) of Rule 28(B) of Rajasthan Administrative Services Rules, 1954 vide Department of Personnel notification no.F7(10)D/A-II/77 dated 30.11.1991 and also seeking a declaration that he be held entitled to promotion to the super time scale of R.A.S. along with S/Shri L.N. Mishra, Jivaram, Pukhraj Saleha and that promotion granted to respondent nos.5 to 15 on the recommendations of the D.P.C. held on 13.12.1991 be held to be illegal and be set aside. 2 The sheer anchor of the arguments raised by the petitioner is that the substituted explanation introduced vide amendment notification dated 30.11.1991 prescribing therein that a candidate has to have five `outstanding' or `very good' ACRs out of the seven preceding years cannot be retrospectively applied and that the said explanation would have only prospective effect. So far as this controversy is concerned, it is squarely covered by a Full Bench decision of this Court in R.Dayal & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.-1996 (3) W.L.C. (Raj.) 513. In so far as challenge to the promotions granted to the private respondents nos.2 to 15 is concerned, this question also cannot be examined in view of the order dated 18.9.09 passed by this Court on application of the petitioner himself whereby on his request and at his risk, names of the above referred to 14 private respondents were ordered to be deleted 3 from the array of respondents. In view of above, I do not find any merit in this writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/