1. - During the course of arguments, a preliminary objection has been raised by the respondents with regard to maintainability of filing the joint writ petition. It is contended by learned counsel for the respondents that in this petition the petitioners are raising voice for seeking the relief of assigning seniority and have prayed for declaring the seniority-lists dated 08.01.1993 and 29.04.1993 as illegal and that it may be declared that the seniority will be determined on the basis of rank only qua the persons who have been appointed at a time and the word "batch" does not refer to complete select-list. The petitioners have further prayed that the provisions contained in Regulation 13(2) of the Dungarpur-Banswara Kshetriya Gramin Bank Staff Service Regulations 1985 may be declared illegal and struck down.

2. Learned counsel for the respondents invited my attention towards judgment of this Court dated 22.10.2007 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6651/2007, Bhanwar Lal Bunker & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. , in which, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court has held that the course adopted by the Hon'ble Division Bench in the case of Chandmal Naurat Mal & Others v. State of Rajasthan & Another (AIR 1968 Rajasthan 20 ) is to grant an opportunity to such joint petitioners to choose, if so desired, a person on their behalf leaving the others to pursue their remedies in accordance with law; and, that the petitioners ought to state their option within two weeks from the date of the order. It is further observed that as and when such option is stated, the office shall deal with the same and list the petitioner appropriately; and, in the other event, the petition may be listed for rejection after two weeks. It is also ordered that it is made clear that the Court has pronounced only on the question of maintainability of joint writ petition; and else, this order shall have no bearing on any other aspect related to any individual petition. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that this joint writ petition is not maintainable in view of the aforesaid order passed in the above mentioned writ petition on 22.10.2007.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners, on the other hand, submits that the facts of that case are not applicable to the present set of facts of this writ petition. In the case of Bhanwarlal Bunkar (supra), the petitioners were seeking relief for quashing order dated 25.09.2003 (Annex.-3 to the writ petition) issued by the respondent in pursuance of order dated 30.07.2007 issued by the State Government, whereby 17 petitioners were transferred/posted in relation to which each of the petitioners offered a separate and distinct cause of action and the petitioners in that writ petition were not considered by the co-ordinate Bench to have the same cause of action because the petitioners of that case were transferred to different places; whereas, in the present writ petition, the petitioners are challenging the seniority-list and claiming declaration to treat the persons who have been appointed at a time and the word "batch" should not be treated to be referring to the complete select-list. The petitioners herein have further prayed that the provisions contained in Regulation 13(2) of the Dungarpur- Banswara Kshetriya Gramin Bank Staff Service Regulations 1985 may be declared illegal and struck down. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, the relief sought in this writ petition is on the basis of same cause of action and according to Rule 375 of the Rules of High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan 1952 (hereinafter "the Rules of 1952") the present petition is maintainable.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently argued that the learned Single Judge of this Court in Bhanwar Lal Bunker's case has heavily relied upon the judgment of the Division Bench, reported in AIR 1968 Rajasthan 20, and held that the joint writ petition filed by 17 persons does not have the same cause of action, therefore, the