NARAYANA PAI, J. ( 1 ) THIS Writ Petition was disposed of by this Court on the 29th of June, 1971 in the absence of Mr. V. K. Govindarajulu, Counsel for the petitioner, but after an examination of the merits of the case with the assistance of the Government Pleader and Mr. Rama Jois, who appeared for one of the respondents. Mr. Govindarajulu has now made an application to set aside the last order and to hear him in support of his client's case. To enable him to do so, we have set aside the last order and heard him and now proceed to dispose of the Writ Petition afresh. ( 2 ) THE petitioner's prayers are for the quashing of the final inter-State seniority list dt. 25th March, 1968 so far as it relates to the cadre of sericultural Inspectors and secondly to issue a mandamus directing the government to prepare afresh an inter-se seniority list of Sericulturists of the ex-Mysore State before the process of integration under S. 115 of the States Reorganisation Act can commence. ( 3 ) AS pointed out in the last order, the principles of law governing the preparation of gradation list called the inter-State seniority list as a result of integration of services are now well established. The two stages to the process are equation of posts and the measuring of length of service in equated posts. Once the conations are validly settled then the only factor for consideration in the matter of settling relative seniority is to determine the length of service of the persons concerned in the equated posts : for the said purpose service of every charactor including temporary and officiating service has to be counted excluding only service, relatable to fortuitous circumstancps and stop-gap arrangement. ( 4 ) NOW in this case the petitioner does not question any equations made for the purpose of settling the final inter-State seniority list which is sought to be quashed. ( 5 ) IT is also indisputable that the petitioner entered service as an inspector of Sericulture on the 6th day of January, 1956. We find from the inter-State seniority list that the said date has been taken as the commencement of service of the petitioner. ( 5 ) IT is also indisputable that the petitioner entered service as an inspector of Sericulture on the 6th day of January, 1956. We find from the inter-State seniority list that the said date has been taken as the commencement of service of the petitioner. ( 6 ) PRIMA facie, therefore, the petitioner could not have any grievance, but he mainly depends upon what is called the effect of an order of the Government of His Highness the Maharaja of Mysore dt. 14th april, 1945 bearing No. E. 4959-60-R and P, S 46-44-2. The order, however, beyond indicating the necessity of strengthening the Dept. by recruiting persons with better educational qualified ions and therefore providing for direct recruitment in respect of 50 per cent of the posts reserving only the remaining 50 per cent for being filled by promotion from lower cadres, does not lay down any principle whereby it is possible to hold that a person's seniority meaning thereby length of service can be counted from a date anterior to the date of his recruitment ( 7 ) MR. GOVINDARAJULU, however, stated, that such a re-doing of seniority irrespective of the date of recruitment or promotion upon the footing that the provision for equal number of direct recruits and promotees in the cadre necessarily involves an invariable alternation between a direct recruit and a promotee and that the said interpretation was applied to the recruitment made in the year 1954. He also relies upon what were called the Mysore State Civil Services Integration Rules of 1960. ( 8 ) WE may at once point out that the integration rules were quite incompetent because as already pointed out by this Court in the case of jalel v. State of Mysore, 1961 Mys. L. J. 425, the power of integration is vested exclusively in the Central Government by virtue of S. 115 of the States Reorganisation act and the State Government's executive power under Article. 162 of the Constitution is to that extent attenuated. L. J. 425, the power of integration is vested exclusively in the Central Government by virtue of S. 115 of the States Reorganisation act and the State Government's executive power under Article. 162 of the Constitution is to that extent attenuated. ( 9 ) SO far as the settlement of inter-se seniority of persons belonging to the same integrating area is concerned, it may be that a question or a dispute relating thereto which had been left undecided by the predecessor government may be decided by the succeesor Government, namely the Government of the new State of Mysore, but in the absence of any such outstanding dispute or question, the Government of the new state of Mysore has no power so to decide a question of inter-se seniority as to impede the exercise of the Central Government's power of integration- vide the case of Chandramouli v. State of Mysore, (1970)2 Mys. L. J. 187. ( 10 ) IT is not, possible, therefore, for the petitioner to relate his claim for a higher seniority than has been assigned to him. on the basis of his entry into service to any acceptable or known principle of law. The writ petition therefore is dismissed. --- *** --- .