SBCWP6607/1997 // 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6607/1997 {Surya Narain Pradhan Vs. The State of Rajasthan and Others} Date of Order ::: 09.02.2010 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq Shri Manoj Pareek for Shri Narendra Mishra, Counsel for petitioner Shri Ganesh Meena, Government Counsel for respondents #### By the Court:- This writ petition has been filed by petitioner with prayer that respondents be directed to prepare a separate seniority list of Senior Teacher in Humanities and Commerce Group on the one hand and Senior Teacher in Science on other hand, because the Notification dated 04.01.1989, issued under the amended Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay Scales) Rules, 1987 called as the Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay Scales) (First Amendment) Rules, 1989, describes two categories of Senior Teachers, referred to above, separately. Learned counsel for petitioner has argued that when two services are separately indicated under two different headings in the SBCWP6607/1997 // 2 // Revised Pay Scales Rules (Supra), there is no reason or logic to club them together in a common seniority list. Action of respondents is arbitrary and discriminatory as well as violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Respondents, in reply to the writ petition, submitted that mere separate mention of two services in the Revised Pay Scales Rules does not necessarily mean that their service conditions are governed by different set of Rules; any amendment in the pay scale rules does not automatically amends the service rules which governs the services of employees. Their seniority is published on the basis of relevant service rules. Petitioner was merely, at the time when he filed writ petition, selected on the post of Senior Teacher on ad-hoc basis and he was not even regularly promoted by the Departmental Promotion Committee and as such he has no locus-standi to make a prayer of this nature. In any case, the learned counsel for respondents submitted that the seniority list issued under the relevant Rules which govern the service conditions, has not been subjected to challenge in this writ petition. The writ petition is misconceived and accordingly be SBCWP6607/1997 // 3 // dismissed. Having heard learned counsel for parties and perused the material on record, I find that petitioner indeed was promoted on ad-hoc basis and at that time he filed the writ petition; his writ petition is solely based on amendment introduced in the Revised Pay Scale Rules, 1987 wherein two posts, referred to above, were separately indicated. This cannot determine the factor for preparing seniority list because seniority list is to be prepared on the basis of the Rules contained in the Rajasthan Education Service Rules, 1970. The relevant Rule has not been subjected to challenge by the petitioner. The writ petition, being devoid of any merit, is hereby dismissed. (Mohammad Rafiq) J. //Jaiman//