( 1 ) THE petitioners in all these cases except the petitioners in the last two cases viz. , WP. Nos. 1809 and 1811 of 1971 were all appointed as Tracers as local candidates on various dates. The petitioner in WP. No. 1809 of 1971 was appointed as a local candidate as Blue Printer and the petitioner in WP. No. 1811 of 1971 was appointed as a local candidate as Computer, on different dates in the year 1960. ( 2 ) THE petitoners in all these cases have prayed for the issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents 1 and 2 to appoint the petitioners as Draughtsmen in the subordinate service of the Mysore public Works Department as from the dates the respondents other than respondents 1 and 2 in the respective writ petitions, were appointed as draughtsmen as local candidates ( 3 ) THOUGH the petitioners were all appointed as local candidates, the services of some of them have been regularised whereas others have been directly recruited on different dates Except the petitioners in WP. Nos. 1809 and 1811 of 1971, the petitioners in all other cases now hold the posts of Tracers not as local candidate but as persons whose services have either been regularised as Tracor who have been regularly appointed to the posts of Tracers. So far as the petitioner in WP No. 1809 of 1971 is concerned, he was appointed as a local candidate in the first instance and his services have been regularised as Blue Printer So far as the petitioner in wp. No 1811 of 1971 is concerned. he was originally appointed as a local candidate but later on, his services were regularised as Computer. So far as the peitioner in WP. No. 1533 of 1971 is concerned, there are a few more facts which require to be noted He was originally appointed as a local candidate as Assistant Draughtsman on the 25th of June 1962. When the authorities noticed that he did not possess the requisite qualification for appointment to the post of Assistant Draughtsman, he was posted as a tracer on the 13th of June 1963 as a local candidate. When the authorities noticed that he did not possess the requisite qualification for appointment to the post of Assistant Draughtsman, he was posted as a tracer on the 13th of June 1963 as a local candidate. He was, in due course, transferred to the Northern Division as a Tracer For sometime in the year 1968-69, he was posted as in-charge Draughtsman and reverted back to his local appointment as Tracer on the 26th of February 1969 His services as tracer were regularised with effect from the 1st of September 1969. ( 4 ) SHRI S. K. Venkataranga lyengar, the learned Counsel for the petitioners, submits that during the pendency of the writ petitions, the petitioner in WP. No. 1533 of 1971 has once again been placed in independent charge of the post of Draughtsman and that the petitioner in WP. No. 2032 of 1973 has similarly been placed in independent charge of the post of Draughtsman. It is well settled that the placing of a person in independent charge of a higher post does not amount to promotion to that post. ( 5 ) THE Mysore Public Works Engineering Department Services (Recruitment) Rules. 1960. were promulgated by the Governor in exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to Art 309 of the Constitution by Notification dt. the 3rd of December 1960. In the said Rules, so far as the posts of Draughtsmen are concerned, it is provided that 90 per cent of the posts should be filled up by direct recruitment from among those who possess a Diploma in Civil Engineering or a Certificate of any Polytechnic or other equivalent qualification. So far as the remaining 10 per cent of the posts of Draughtsmen are concerned, it is provided that the same should be filled up by promotion of Tracers who have five years' service as Tracers and who have passed the test conducted by the Chief engineer General. So far as the posts of Tracers are concerned, they are all required to be filled up by direct recruitment from among candidates who possess the qualification of SSLC or equivalent qualification and one year's training in Drawing or Tracing in a Polytechnic or ether recognised institution. The posts of Blueprinters and Computers are not included in the cadre and Recruitment Rules. The posts of Blueprinters and Computers are not included in the cadre and Recruitment Rules. As already mentioned, the promotional vacancies in the posts of Draughtsmen have to be filled up only by promor ting Tracers and not those holding the posts of Blueprinters and Computers. The petitioners in all these cases do not hold a Diploma in Civil Engineering or a Certificate of any Polytechnic. Their case is that they possess equivalent qualification and that therefore they are qualified for direct recruitment to the posts of Draughtsmen. ( 6 ) IT is not necessary, in these cases, to examine as to whether the qualifications which the petitioners possess can be regarded as qualifications equivalent to the qualification of Diploma in Civil Engineering or certificate of a Polytechnic required to be possessed for appointment to the posts of Draughtsmen in accordance with the Cadre and Recruitment rules. It is, however, pointed out that there has been a good deal of confusion in the matter of issuing notifications declaring that certain Certificates of ccxtain Institutions are qualifications equivalent to the qualification of Diploma in Civil Engineering or Certificate in a Polytechnic. For the disposal of these cases, I will proceed on the basis that the petitioners do possess the educational qualification prescribed for appointment to the posts of Draughtsmen. ( 7 ) THE petitioners claim that they should be appointed as Draughtsmen with effect from the dates on which the, respondents other than respendents 1 and 2 in these writ petitions, were appointed as Draughtsmen as local candidats. The petitioners in all these, cases except the petitioners in WP. Nos. 1809 and 1811 of 1971 are now holding the posts of Tracers in the Public Works Department either by virtue of regularisation of their services or by virtue of their direct recruitment to those posts. The normal avenue of promotion available under tha Cadre and Recruitment Rules is by the process of promotion in the 10 per cent of the vacancies which are required to be filled up by the process of promotion. It is not the case of these petitioners that their cases should be considered for promotion in the 10 per cent of the vacancies which are required to be filled up by the process of promotion. It is not the case of these petitioners that their cases should be considered for promotion in the 10 per cent of the vacancies which are required to be filled up by the process of promotion. They claim to be appointed as direct recruits to the posts of Draughtsmen, It is not the prayer of the petitioners in these cases that respondents 1 and 2, the State of Mysore (now Karnataka) and the Chief Engineer, should be directed to take appropriate steps for filling up the posts of Draughtsmen by direct recruitment in accordance with the relevant Rules of Recruitment. One mors fact that is relevant to be noticed is that by an order dt. the 25th of May 1971, as many as 108 persons were appointed by the Chief Engineer, Communications and Buildings, Bangalore, as Draughtsmen as local candidates purely on a temporary basis. ( 8 ) THE first contention of Shri Venkataranga, Iyengar is that seversl junior local candidates-Tracers possessing similar qualifications were appointed as Draughtsmen as local candidates without considering the claims of the petitioners. It was urged that this action of the Chief Engineer is violative of Arts. 14 and 16 of the Constitution The prayer of the petitioners fo,r a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents 1 and 2 to appoint them as Draughtsmen as on the dates on which some of the respondents impleaded in these writ petitions were appointed, amounts to seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents 1 and 2 to appoint the petitioners also as local candidates to the posts of Draughtsmen. That is clear because the persqns who were appointed as Draughtsmen, were all appointed as local candidates on different dates. The claim of the petitioners is that they were entitled to be appointed as local candidates as draughtsmen in preference to those appointed now who), according to the petitioners, are their juniors. The question for consideration is as to whether the petitioners can claim relief on the, basis of Arts. 14 and 16 of the Constitution. ( 9 ) THE expression 'local candidate' has been defined in Rule 8 (27a) of the Mysore Civil Services Rules, as follows : " A ' Local Candidate' in service means a temporary Government servant not appointed regularly as per rules of recruitment to that service. 14 and 16 of the Constitution. ( 9 ) THE expression 'local candidate' has been defined in Rule 8 (27a) of the Mysore Civil Services Rules, as follows : " A ' Local Candidate' in service means a temporary Government servant not appointed regularly as per rules of recruitment to that service. " in view of this definition of the expression ' local candidate', it is clear that the appointment of a local candidate is an irregular appointment and not in accordance, with the relevant rules of recruitment. Such appointments are normally made in the exigencies of service, either when the vacancy is of a very short duration or when the filling up of the posts by recruitment in accordance with the relevant rules is likely to take some time. Such appointments are, in the very nature of things, made by way of some sort of stop-gap arrangement. Hence the status of a person appointed as a local candidate is that of a person who, has not secured the post in accordance with the relevant rules of recruitment. A writ in the nature of mandamus, in my opinion, cannot be issued for directing the authorities to commit irregularity merely on the ground that the authorities have committed such irregularity by appointing some other persons as local candidates. Arts. 14 and 16 of the Constitution which are fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, confer the right of equality in all matters including the masters pertaining to appointment to the services of the State Government. If appointments are made, not in accordance, with law but by denying the equality of opportunity in the master of appointment which is violative of Arts. 14 and 16 of the Constitution, an aggrieved person can legitimately ask for enforcement of his rights and for that purpose, an appropriate writ for quashing the illegal appointment made or a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the concerned Authorities to take steps to fill up the posts in accordance with the relevant rules of recruitment, can be issued. When the authorities appoint a person as a local candidate In contravention of the Cadre and Recruitment Rules, an irregularity or illegality will have been committed. An aggrieved person cannot invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Art. 226 of the constitution to command the authorities to commit a similar irregularity in his case also. When the authorities appoint a person as a local candidate In contravention of the Cadre and Recruitment Rules, an irregularity or illegality will have been committed. An aggrieved person cannot invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Art. 226 of the constitution to command the authorities to commit a similar irregularity in his case also. I am, therefore, of the opinion that the petitioners cannot ask this Court to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents 1 and 2 to appoint the petitioners also a local candidates as Draughtsmen in contravention of the relevant rules of recruitment merely because, such irregularity or illegality has been committed in respect of some other persons, by appointing them as local candidates as Draughtsmen. That under the Mysore Civil Services Rules a person appointed as a local candidate is also entitled to certain rights and privileges does not alter the character of such an appointment, which is, in the very nature of things, irregular. It has to be pointed out that it is not the prayer of the petitioners in these cases either that the appointment of some of the local candidates as Draughtsmen should be quashed or that a writ in the nature of mandamus should be issued directing respondents 1 and 2 to fill up the posts of Draughtsmen by direct recruitment in accordance with the relevant rules of recruitment In these circumstances, it if not possible to accede to the prayer of the petitioners that a writ in the nature of mandamus should be issued directing respondents 1 and 2 to appoint the petitioners as Draughtsmen as local candidates with effect from the dates on which several other persons were appointed as local candidates as draughtsmen. ( 10 ) SHRI Venkataranga lyengar relief upon a decision of this Court in WP. No. 878 of 1963 decided on the 16th of July 1965 (1 ). That was a case in which the petitioner was no,t given the pay scale of Rs. 150-320 Attached to the post of Draughtsman on the ground that the qualification possessed by the petitioner in that case was not one of the qualifications prescribed for appointment to the post of Draughtsman. That was a case in which the petitioner was no,t given the pay scale of Rs. 150-320 Attached to the post of Draughtsman on the ground that the qualification possessed by the petitioner in that case was not one of the qualifications prescribed for appointment to the post of Draughtsman. This Court came to the conclusion, haying regard to the relevant orders of the Government, that the qualification possessed by the petitioner therein was an equivalent qualification and that, therefore, the petitioner in that case could not be denied the scale of pay of Rs. 150-320 attached to, the post of Draughtsman to which he was appointed That decision, therefore, is not of any assistance for deciding the question involved in these casee. ( 11 ) THE next decision relied upon by Shri Venkataranga lyengar is the one rendered in WP. No. 2590 of 1967 (2) decided on the 9th of July 1970. The petitioner in that case complained that though he made an application for appointment to the post of Draughtsman, his application was not considered when fifty persons were directly recruited as Draughtsmen. On examination of the facts, this Court came to the conclusion that the petitioner in that case had made an application for appointment to the post of Draughtsman and that the said application was not considered when fifty posts of Draughtsmen were filled up by direct recruitment . In the present batch of cases, it is not the petitioner' case that when any posts were filled up by direct recruitment, they made applications for appointment and that those applications were not considered by the appointing authority. It has also to be noticed that in WP. NO. 2590 of 1967 fifty posts of Draughtsmen were filled up by direct recruitment, but the order passed therein does not disclose that these fifty posts of Draughtsmen were filled up by local appointment and not by regular appointment in accordance with the relevant rules of recruitment. That decision is, therefore, not of any assistance for deciding the question raised in these cases. The learned Counsel for the petitioners, however, submitted that some of the petitioners, have made representations to the concerned authorities and that those representations should be regarded as applications. I find it difficult to accede to this contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioners. The learned Counsel for the petitioners, however, submitted that some of the petitioners, have made representations to the concerned authorities and that those representations should be regarded as applications. I find it difficult to accede to this contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioners. The question of submitting applications will arise only when applications are called for, for the purpose of direct recruitment in accordance with the relevant recruitment rules. It is when such" applications are called for, that one would be entitled to make an application for appointment. If such an application of a person presented within' time ia not considered, a legitimate relief can be, asked for the issue, of a, writ in the nature of mandamus directing the authorities to consider his application for appointment. As already mentioned, it is not the case of the petitioners that there was any regular recruitment or that any applications for appointment were called for or that local appointment of some respondents were made by the concerned authorities as and when vacancies arose, without calling for applications for that purpose. Shri Mandappa, the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 and 2, submitted that in the year 1973, vacancies of the posts of Draughtsmen were, as a matter of fact, advertised and they were filled up by direct recruitment after selection by the Public Service Commission. He also placed tor my perusal a Notification of the Mysore Public Service Commission dt. the 28th of February 1973 which states that In pursuance of the Notification dt. 6th of April 1972 inviting applications for recruitment to the posts of Draughtsmen in the Public Works Department, the candidates mentioned in the said Notification have been selected by the Public service Commission for appointment to the posts of Draughtsmen. When those posts were advertised by the Public Service Commission, the petitioners could have availed of the opportunity and offered themselves as candidates, if they were qualified, and sought appointment to the posts of Draughtsmen in accordance with the relevant rules of recruitment. Consequent upon such a regular recruitment in pursuance of the selections made by the Public Service Commission, the persons appointed as local candidates as Draughtsmen will necessarily have, to yield place to those who are directly recruited. Consequent upon such a regular recruitment in pursuance of the selections made by the Public Service Commission, the persons appointed as local candidates as Draughtsmen will necessarily have, to yield place to those who are directly recruited. In view of the selections made by the public Service Commission for the posts of Draughtsmen in pursuance of which appointments are made, the grievance of the petitioners in regard to appointment of local candidates does not merit any consideration. ( 12 ) SO far as the petitioner in WP. No. 1533 of 1971 is concerned, an additional argument was advanced to the effect that he haying been appointed as Assistant Draughtsman on the 25th of June, 1962, he should have been continued in that post which has been redesignated as Draughtsman and that the order posting him as Tracer in the year 1963, is not in accordance with law. It was submitted that it is on a wrong assumption that the petitioner in WP. No. 1533 of 1971 did not possess the requisite qualification, that he came to be posted as Tracer. But it has to be pointed out that the appointment of the petitioner to the post of Assistant draughtsman was also as a local candidate and that the cause of action, if any. accrued in the year 1963. Therefore, the claim of the petitioner in wp. 1533/71 is highly belated and does not merit any further consideration. ( 13 ) THE petitioners in all these cases except the petitioners in WP. Nos. 1809 and 1811 of 1971 have, in the circumstances, to aspire to get appointed to the posts of Draughtsmen by the process of promotion to the 10 per cent of the posts that are available for promotion if they are qualified and as and when an occasion arises for direct recruitment, it is open to them to apply for being appointed by the process of direct recruitment. So far as the petitioners in WP. Nos. 1809 and 1811 of 1971 are, concerned, they, not being Tracers, cannot aspire for being promoted to the posts of draughtsmen and those posts are available for promotion only to the tracers. ( 14 ) THE petitioners have put in a long number of years of service and some; of them have very good academic achievements to their credit. Nos. 1809 and 1811 of 1971 are, concerned, they, not being Tracers, cannot aspire for being promoted to the posts of draughtsmen and those posts are available for promotion only to the tracers. ( 14 ) THE petitioners have put in a long number of years of service and some; of them have very good academic achievements to their credit. The, promotional vacancies being only 10 per cent, it is likely to cause; frustration if Tracers, who have put in a long number of years of service, cannot get promoted within a reasonable period It is a matter which does require a sympathetic consideration at the hands of the Government in the matter of providing a higher percentage of posts for being filled up by the process of promotion. So far as the posts of Blueprinters and Computers are concerned, it is desirable that those posts are included in the Cadre and recruitment Rules and that appropriate avenues of promotions are made available to, them. ( 15 ) SUBJECT to these observations, these writ petitions fail and are dismissed. No costs. --- *** --- .