SBCWP NO.1140/1995 – HARI SINGH V/S STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. - ORDER DTD.15.9.2008 1/4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR. S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1140/1995 Hari Singh versus The State of Rajasthan and ors. PRESENT HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI None present for the petitioner. Mr.Deepak Chaudhary, for the respondents. . DATE OF ORDER : 15th September, 2008. JUDGMENT 1. On the last occasion, both the counsels submitted that similar matter, namely, Satish Kumr Jain V/s State of Rajasthan was pending at Jaipur Bench of this Court. However, since they were not aware about the fate of that writ petition, they prayed for short adjournment to ascertain status of that matter. Today also, when the matter was taken up, no body was present on behalf of the petitioner to inform the status. SBCWP NO.1140/1995 – HARI SINGH V/S STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. - ORDER DTD.15.9.2008 2/4 2. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that in absence of any particulars furnished by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the status could not be ascertained, therefore, the matter was heard on merits. 3. The petitioner in this writ petition has claimed that amendment in Schedule III of the Rajasthan Agriculture Service Rules, 1960 deserves to be quashed and struck down and the petitioner may be promoted as Assistant Engineer w.e.f. 30.3.1993 when his juniors were so promoted to the said post. 4. In the reply filed on behalf of the respondents, the respondents have submitted that after amendment in the Rules w.e.f. 1.4.1991 after holding Departmental Promotion Committee, the due promotions have been accorded to the various persons and the petitioner cannot validly challenge the said amendment in the Rules and seniority and promotion accorded to other persons cannot be disrupted at this belated stage. SBCWP NO.1140/1995 – HARI SINGH V/S STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. - ORDER DTD.15.9.2008 3/4 5. By amendment w.e.f. 1.4.1991 (Annex.4), proviso substituted w.e.f. 1.4.1991 provides that the employees holding decree in Civil or Mechanical Engienering of a Univeristy established by law in India with 5 years experience on the post mentioned in column 5 or diploma in Civil or Mechanical Engineering of a recognised Institution with 10 years experience on the post mentioned in column 5 shall be eligible to be considered for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer in the ratio given in the said Rules. The petitioner being belonging to the Civil Engineering cadre holding Civil Engineering decree, is aggrieved by the said amendment which included the degree holders and diploma holders from mechanical branch also by way of said proviso to be considered for promotion. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the respondents, this Court is of the opinion that no valid exception can be taken to the said amendment under the Rules of 1960 by including both the degree holder in Civil Engineering and Degree and Diploma Holder in Mechanical Engineering for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer. The petitioner also cannot challenge the seniority and SBCWP NO.1140/1995 – HARI SINGH V/S STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. - ORDER DTD.15.9.2008 4/4 promotion of other persons without impleading them as respondents in the writ petition. 7. Accordingly this writ petition is found to be devoid of merit and the same is accordingly dismissed. (Dr.VINEET KOTHARI)J. Item No.5 Ss/-