1. - The appeal is admitted. Mr. Virendra Lodha waives service for respondent. Looking to the controversy raised in the appeal, we are satisfied that the appeal may be heard at this stage itself. We proceed accordingly.

2. The present appellant is an unsuccessful writ petitioner. The writ petition filed by him came to be dismissed by the Single Judge on technical ground that the matter pertains to the jurisdiction of the principal seat at Jodhpur.

3. The appellant (for short, 'the petitioner') invoked high prerogative jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for the following reliefs :

"(i) To direct the respondent to pay the salary to the petitioner to the post of Chief Chemist on which he is serving and discharging the duties as such for the last 7 years (since 19th January, 1992);

(ii) To direct the respondent to fill up the post of Chief Chemist which is lying vacant since 1990 by promotion and as per the Rules of 1996 amended in the year 1998 at the earliest and within a specified time;

(iii) To direct the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner to the post of Chief Chemist on regular side while making selection by promotion to the aforesaid post as per the Rules of 1996, which were amended in the year 1998;

(iv) Respondent may be directed to make payment of the salary to the post of Chief Chemist to the petitioner since 18th January, 1992 as the petitioner is 'discharging the duties and responsibilities of the same since then;

(v) Any other order which is just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in favour of the petitioner, which could not be prayed for specifically either due to inadvertance or ignorance but to which the petitioner is entitled in the interest of justice;

(vi) Any other order which is just and proper in the interest of justice and in favour of the petitioner in the changed and subsequent circumstances may also be passed in favour of the petitioner so as to do justice with him;

(vii) The writ petition be allowed with costs."

4. The aforesaid reliefs, were claimed against the Rajasthan State Ganganagar Sugar Mills Limited (for short, 'the respondent').

5. That the respondent has its registered office at Jaipur is not in dispute.

6. The principal grievance of the petitioner, firstly was that since 18th January, 1992 he has been discharging the duties of Chief Chemist and, therefore, entitled to the salary for that post since that date and, secondly, that being eligible for the post of Chief Chemist, he is entitled to be promoted to the post of Chief Chemist which has been lying vacant since 1990.

7. The Single Judge heavily relied upon the order dated 30.08.1990 passed by the Single Judge of this court in the writ petition filed by the petitioner earlier and dismissed the writ petition on the ground of jurisdiction as noticed above.

8. It is true that the petitioner filed the writ petition being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4560/1989 earlier to the present controversy for quashing the selection/appointment of one Subhash Mukherjee on the post of Deputy Chief Chemist and also for quashing the selection/appointment by way of extension of one R.P. Agrawal on the post of Chief Chemist and for a further direction to the respondent to promote him on the post of Deputy Chief Chemist and for grooming him for Chief Chemist. In that writ i petition, a preliminary objection was raised by the respondent that since the post of Deputy Chief Chemist and Chief Chemist pertain to the respondent having its factory at Sri Ganganagar and, therefore, the principal seat at Jodhpur alone has jurisdiction to entertain such writ petition and not the Jaipur Bench. Reliance was placed by the respondent in this regard upon the notification dated December 23, 1976 issued by the then Acting Chief Justice.

9. The Single Judge in the earlier matter considered the objection thus :

"At the outset, it may be stated that we cannot link Article 226(1) & (2) of the Const