B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith with consent. Looking to the nature of the controversy and the Judgments delivered earlier, we have heard the respective counsel finally. Learned Advocate Shri Naik appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner earlier shown as senior in the seniority list of Junior clerks has been shown as juniors to respondent Nos. 4 to 12 in seniority list as published on 24-1-2011 and rejecting objection of petitioner thereto on 31-12-2011. He contends that the appointment of the petitioner as Junior Clerk in 1984 was in accordance with the provisions of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads District Service Post Recruitment Examination Rules, 1985 and as per Rule 4 stipulated therein, first examination was held in 1989. Period of 4 years to pass the examination was to expire in 1993. The petitioner cleared the necessary departmental examination conducted in 1992 as per result declared on 8-3-1993 i.e. within a period of four years as also within three chances. As such, the petitioner was confirmed prior to and became senior to respondent Nos. 4 to 12. He further contends that respondent Nos. 4 to 12 could not pass that