1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.8579/05 Subhash Chandra Kulhari vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of order : 24/9/2008. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Rohitash Choudhary for Shri Praveen Balwada for the petitioner. Shri B.L. Avasthi, Addl. Govt. Counsel for the respondents. ****** Petitioner who was originally appointed as Constable on 6.9.03 applied for appointment on the post of Physical Teacher Grade-III in response to the notification dated 28.7.2003 issued by the respondents. Petitioner was appointed on the aforesaid post. He was relieved from his earlier assignment on 12.4.04 and subsequently he joined the new assignment on 21.7.2004. Petitioner has now approached this Court with the prayer that the respondents be directed to treat his appointment having been made under the Old Pension Scheme and not under the Contributory Pension Scheme which has been enforced with effect from 1.1.2004. Shri Rohitash Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the 2 petitioner was initially appointed with the respondent State on the post of Constable on 6.9.2003 and when he was relieved from the post of Constable on 12.4.2004, it was very much mentioned in the relieving order that he was being relieved to join the post of Physical Teacher Gr.III. Shri B.L. Avasthi, learned Additional Government Counsel for State opposed the writ petition and argued that petitioner applied declaring himself to be unemployed person. In any case, the notification advertising posts of Physical Teacher issued by the respondents on 28.7.2003 in clause 13 categorically stated that those appointed pursuant to this notification would be governed by the Contributory Pension Scheme. If the petitioner wanted to continue in his old scheme, there was no compulsion for him to apply for the post of Physical Teacher Gr.III. He on his own choice applied and was appointed on this post and since the appointment was made under the new scheme, the contributory pension scheme would be applied. Upon hearing learned counsel for the 3 parties and perusing the material on record, I find that the order of relieving dated 12.4.2004 merely states that the petitioner would have to submit bond on a non judicial stamp paper of Rs.10 in accordance with Rule 22A of Rajasthan Service Rules for appointment on the post of Constable for five years. The respondents have in the first place has asserted that he applied declaring himself to be unemployed but even if that is ignored, the fact remains that notification by which the applications were invited clearly stated that Contributory Pension Scheme shall be applicable in regard to the post so advertised. Being aware of the conditions of appointment and willingly applied therefor, the petitioner cannot be now allowed to question those condition. He is now estopped from challenging the said condition because he out of his own free will applied for the new appointment. I do not find any merit in this writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed. RS/ (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J.