The main legal point established in the judgment is that the classification made by the rule making authority in granting bonus marks for working experience was unreasonable and violative of Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India.

JUDGMENT

Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, J. - By Writ Petition No. 7316/2017 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the constitutional validity of proviso to Rule 273 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996, substituted by the Rajasthan Panchayanti Raj (Amendment) Rules, 2013 vide Notification dated 29.01.2013 (Annexure-2).

2. Petitioners have prayed for following reliefs:-

"a) By an appropriate writ, order and direction in the nature thereof the amended provision of Rule 273 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules 1996 amended vide Notification dated 29.01.2013 may kindly be held ultra-virus to the Constitution of India, illegal, arbitrary and the same may kindly be quashed and set aside.

b) By an appropriate writ order and direction alternatively the respondents may kindly be directed to further amend the provision of Rule 273 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules 1996 and include the posts on which the petitioners have worked in Mid-Day Meal Scheme in the Rule 273 of the Rules 1996.

c) By an appropriate writ order and direction the respondents may be directed to give benefit of bonus marks to the petitioners on their respective posts under Mid-day Meal Scheme in the light of clarification Order dated 21.04.2017.

d) By an appropriate writ order and direction the respondent Chief Executive Officer Zila Parishad Jaipur may be directed to issue Experience Certificate to the petitioners on the basis of their services through placement agency.

e) By an appropriate writ order and direction the respondents may be directed to consider experience certificates and give benefit of bonus marks and give appointment to the post of LDC Recruitment 2013 if found eligible and suitable on the basis of merits with all consequential benefits.

f) Any other order or direction this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper be also passed in favour of the Petitioners."

3. At the out set, learned counsel for the parties have jointly submitted that in so far as petitioner No. 1-Tikam Chand Verma, petitioner No. 5-Rajesh Kushwah and petitioner No. 6-Manoj Kumar Nahar in Writ Petition No. 7316/2017 are concerned, on account of subsequent notification, their grievance has been redressed as now they have been granted weightage of experience of the post on which they were working. Therefore, this petition in so far as petitioners No. 1, 5 & 6 are concerned, is rendered infructuous.

4. Petitioner No. 2-Shankar Lal Lakhera, petitioner No. 3-Poonam Saini and petitioner No. 4-Jitendra Kumar Sharma were appointed through placement agency on different posts. Petitioners No. 2 & 3 were appointed as Steno, whereas, petitioner No. 4 was appointed as Assistant Staff in the Mid-Day Meal Scheme of the Central Government implemented by the State. Statement of posts as issued by the Deputy Commissioner (Finance) has also been placed on record as Annexure-4.

5. In exercise of powers conferred by Section 102 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (Act No. 13 of 1994) and all other powers enabling in this behalf, the State Government framed rules known as Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996, hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1996'. Amongst various provisions, the aforesaid Rules also provided for appointment to various posts. Rule 273 of the Rules of 1996 was amended by adding a provision vide Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Second Amendment) Rules, 2012 vide Notification dated 17.12.2012. The proviso so added laid down qualification and experience required for appointment to the post of Lower Division Clerk.

6. The rule was again amended vide Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Amendment) Rules, 2013 by which the proviso added earlier vide (Second Amendment) Rules, 2012 was again substituted by a new proviso as below:-

"Provided also that in case of appointment to the post of Lower Division Clerk, merit shall be prepared by the Appointing Authority on the basis of such weightage as may be specified by the State Government for the marks obtained in Senior