JUDGMENT 1. - Three writ petitions, namely S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1803/1980, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1855 of 1980 and S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1877 of 1980 were disposed by the learned Single Judge by his order dated 12th December, 1990. All the writ petitions were partly allowed to the extent that the selection of Kailash Chaturvedi as Principal of Acharya College by the Departmental Promotion Committee held in 1980 for the vacancies as on April 1, 1979 was set aside and the order of appointment issued in pursuance of the said Departmental Promotion Committee was also set aside. The State was directed to reconvene the Departmental Promotion Committee for one vacancy as on April 1, 1979, of eligible persons in the light of the observations made in the judgment. Against this decision in the three writ petitions, mentioned above, Kailash Chaturvedi has preferred three special appeals, namely, D.B. Civil Special Appeals Nos. 7/91, 28/91, 29/91 and 30/91. Writ Petitioner Motilal Joshi has also preferred special appeal against the same judgment as his writ petition was only partly allowed. Kailash Chaturvedi who was respondent in the writ petitions has filed another D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 654 of 1991 challenging the validity of the Note appended to Ordinance 65 sub-clause (iii) in Part 9 in the Statute Book of University of Rajasthan. The above mentioned four special appeals and the writ petition of Kailash Chaturvedi, all are connected matters hence, they are being disposed by this common order. 2. The main question in all these matters relates to the eligibility of candidates for purpose of appointment to the post of Principal, Acharya College and Professor and Head of Acharya Department. The main controversy in the case has arisen because earlier Hindi was a subject in Sanskrit study but later on the subject Hindi ceased to be a subject for Post Graduate classes i.e. Acharya Classes in the year 1971. Shri Kailash Chaturvedi was was initially appointed as Lecturer in Hindi and subsequently promoted as Professor in Hindi could no longer'-)e in the line of promotion as his degree was in Hindi and this was no longer a subject in Sanskrit. 3. Shri Kailash Chaturvedi was was initially appointed as Lecturer in Hindi and subsequently promoted as Professor in Hindi could no longer'-)e in the line of promotion as his degree was in Hindi and this was no longer a subject in Sanskrit. 3. In the University of Rajasthan, Sanskrit is a subject for the graduate and post graduate classes and besides this, there is a separate system of Sanskrit study from the lower level to .that of Post Graduate Classes and these are under the Sanskrit Directorate which was opened in the year 1958 and it awards separate degree. Upadhyay is equivalent to Higher Secondary. Shastri degree is equivalent to graduate degree and Acharya degree is equivalent to Post Graduate degree. The other higher degrees after post graduation are Vidhyavaridhi and Vachaspati. It may be mentioned here that the degree of Acharya is given in the specialities which are different subjects under Sanskrit Education such as Sahitya, Vyakarana, one of the four Vedas, Samanya Darashana, Vedanta, Mimansa, Nyaya Darshan, Paurohitya, Dharmshastra and Puranetihas etc. It may be mentioned here that the above equation is not relevant for purposes of qualifications for eligibility to a particular post. 4. With this back ground in view of the qualifications and service history of the appellant Kailash Chaturvedi and the three writ petitioners and others may be looked into : (1) Kailash Chaturvedi : Educational Qualification (a) M.A. Hindi (Ilnd Division) 1963 (b) M.A. Sanskrit (IIIrd Division) 1965 (c) Acharya in Sahitya (IInd Div.) 1967 Service History : (a) Asstt. Teacher 7.10.1958 to 15.9.1963 (b) Lecturer in Hindi 16.9.1963 to 22.1.1968 (c) Principal, Upadhyaya/Shastri College 23.1.1968 to 30.7.1968 (d) Professor in Hindi 31.7.1968 to 3.12.1968 (e) Professor, Literary and Cultural History of Ancient India and Comparative Philology 3.12.1980 5. While being posted as Professor in Hindi during the aforesaid period, he w4s transferred to the post of Professor in History, in Sanskrit College under order dated December 3rd, 1973. On abolition of the post of Professor in Hindi in Maharaja Sanskrit College, he was declared surplus and was adjusted on the vacant post of Professor of Literary and Cultural History of Ancient India under order dated March 20,1980. Shri Chaturvedi was appointed as Principal, Acharya College on December 4,1980 and he was working as such up to the date of filing of the writ petition. Shri Chaturvedi was appointed as Principal, Acharya College on December 4,1980 and he was working as such up to the date of filing of the writ petition. (2) Vasudeo Shastri : Educational Qualifications : (a) Degree of Shastri in 1952 (b) Degree of Acharya in 1963 (c) Degree of Acharya (Sahitya) in 1968 From University of Dharbhangha in Ist Div. 1968 (d) Doctorate (Vidya Varidi) in 1971 from Varanasi Sanskrit Vishavavidhalaya; Service History : (a) Joined service of the State Government on 16.3.1955 (b) Posted as Lecturer at Kalyan Sanskrit College, Sikar on 29.4.1968 (c) Promoted as Professor and Head of the Department on 28.9.72, and posted at Govt. Sanskrit. College, Jodhpur. Working as such upto date. (3) Ratan Lai Dadhich : Educational Qualification : (a) Sahitya Ratan 1951 (b) Intermediate and Prabhakar 1954 (c) Sahitya Shastri 1955 (d) Sahityacharya examination 1957 (e) B.A. Examination in History and English Literature 1959 (f) M.A. in Hindi 1972 Service History: (a) Teacher Grade III in Sanskrit Education Department 6.8.1956 confirmed in 1957 (b) Teacher Grade II 26.1.1960 (c) Lecturer in Sahitya 11.11.1963 (d) Screened under 1966 Rules and on being found suitable confirmed as Lecturer in Sahitya 5.4.1988 A note was inserted that the date of confirmation and seniority will be determined later on. (e) Promoted as Principal Upadhyaya College on urgent temporary basis appointed on 23.8.71. joined on 3.9.71 (f) Posted as Principal Shastri College (a College of higher standard than Upadhyaya College) 19.9.73 (g) Promoted as Professor (Literature) on the basis of selection by D.P.C. 11.11.1975 (h) Confirmed as Professor (Literature) working as such upto date. w.e.f. 1.3.77 (4) Motilal Joshi Educational Qualification : (a) Acharya Sahitya (IInd Div.) 1960 (b) Acharya Vyakarn (IInd Div.) 1961 (c) Shastri (English) 1963 (d) Hindi Visarad (IInd Div.) 1951 (e) Acharya Sahitya (Ist Div.) 1969 (f) Title Examination in Kavya (IInd Div.) 1950 Service History (a) Assistant Teacher from 23.755 to 30.9.56 (b) Graduate Teacher from 1.10.1956 to 16.09.1963 (c) Principal, Upadhyaya/Shastri College from 17.09.1963 to 17.11.1967 (d) Principal Shastri College from 18.11.1967 to 22.07.1979 (e) Professor Head of Acharya (Sahitya) from 23.07.1979 to 07.11.1985 (f) Principal, Acharya College from 08.11.1985 till date. (5) Chandi Prasad : Educational Qualification : (a) Degree of Acharya in Vyakaran (Ilnd Div.) 1953 (b) Degree of Acharya in Sahitya (IIIrd Div.) 1958 Service History (a) Assistant Teacher (Grade-III) from 15.07.1953 to 04.10.1961 (b) Assistant Teacher Grade II from 05.10.1961 to 11.01.1963. (c) Lecturer (Vyakaran) from 12.11.1963 to 24.05.1974 (d) Principal, Acharya College, Jaipur after selection by DPC up to the date of filing of writ petition. from 04.12.1980 till the date of filing of the writ petition. 6. Under the Rajasthan Sanskrit Education Service Rules, 1977, the scheme is that under group 'C' Principals of Shastri College/ Principals of Upadhyaya Colleges/Deputy Inspectors are appointed 50% by direct recruitment and 50% by promotion from the posts of Lecturers/Head Masters of Praveshika Vidhyalya/Senior Teachers. Promotion to the group 'B' posts of Professor/Assistant Director/Inspector is to be 50% by direct recruitment and 50% by promotion from the posts meant in group 'C'. The posts of Principal Acharya College is in group 'A' and is to be filled by 100% by promotion from posts in group 'B'. The post of Director is to be filled from the group II posts by promotion. The minimum qualifications for Director is (a) first class Acharya with English as one of the subject in Shastri or B.A. or First Class Post Graduate in Sanskrit with English as one of the subject in B.A. or in Shastri and (b) five years teaching experience of Acharya or Post Graduate Classes in an institution not below Acharya/Post Graduate College or Five years experience as Professor in an University established by law. 7. For direct recruitment's quota it is prescribed that the qualifications and experience for direct recruitment shall be as laid down by the University of Rajasthan from time to time in the subject concerned. Ordinance 65 of the University of Rajasthan lays down the minimum qualifications for Teachers in Faculty of Sanskrit studies. The details have been given in para 7 of the judgment of the learned Single Judge. Ordinance 329 M provides that the examination conducted by the Faculty of Sanskrit study shall be Shastri, Acharya, Vidyavaridhi and Vachaspati. General Hindi is neither a compulsory subject nor an optional subject. Under Ordinance 329 M (ii) Samanya Hindi is compulsory in the first year examination of Shastri examination, which is a three year course. Hindi Sahitya is an optional subject. Hindi is not an. General Hindi is neither a compulsory subject nor an optional subject. Under Ordinance 329 M (ii) Samanya Hindi is compulsory in the first year examination of Shastri examination, which is a three year course. Hindi Sahitya is an optional subject. Hindi is not an. optional or compulsory subject for the Acharya Classes. In the Degree of Acharya there 13 specialities and a subject Literary and Cultural History of Ancient India and Comparative Philology which is hereafter referred to as Sanskrit History. 8. Ordinance 65 which provides for educational qualifications in the faculty of Sanskrit study lays down the following for Head of Acharya Department:- "O.65. (A) ............ (B) ................. (C) for Heads of Acharya Department : First class Acharya Degree in the subject with five years teaching experience of Sahstri and/or Acharya classes, OR Second class Acharya Degree in the subject with five years experience of teaching (not below Shastri classes) out of which at least three years experience of teaching Acharya classes, provided that the condition of three years teaching experience of Acharya Classes shall not apply in the case of a candidate who possesses a recognised research degree. NB : For the subject of literary and Cultural History of Ancient India and Comparative Philology the Head must possess the Master of Arts Degree in Sanskrit in place of Acharya Degree. General Notes : (1) A person possessing both Acharya and MA in Sanskrit degree shall be considered qualified to teach Shastri and Acharya classes if he has passed either of them in Second division, experience of teaching remains the same. "(2) In the case of persons who do not possess the minimum qualifications mentioned above and were either on probation or confirmed before the revised Ordinance came into force, the State Government/ Management may move the University for exemption from the above minimum qualification (The revised Ordinance came into force with effect from 14th May, 1971)." 9. In the same Ordinance the minimum qualifications for Principal of Acharya College have also been laid down. In the same Ordinance the minimum qualifications for Principal of Acharya College have also been laid down. So far as the qualifications for Principals and Head of Acharya College are concerned the Syndicate approved certain amendments in the meeting held on 27/28th July, 1979 and the N.B. appearing after the qualifications was recorded and after the amendment the educational qualifications and experience for Lecturers of Acharya College and Heads of Acharya Departments are as under: "For lecturers of Acharya Classes : A first class Acharya Degree in the subject, or a Second Class Acharya Degree,in the subject with 3 years experience of teaching subject of literary and Cultural History of Ancient India and Comparative Philology the basic qualification shall be at least second class Master's degree in Sanskrit, or Acharya Degree in any subject. For Heads of Acharya Department : First Class Acharya Degree in the subject with five years teaching experience of Shastri and/or Acharya Classes, or Second Class Acharya Degree in the subject with five years experience of teaching (not below Shastri Classes) out of which atleast three years experience of teaching Acharya classes, provided that the condition of three years teaching experience of Acharya Classes shall not apply in the case of a candidate who possessed a recognised research degree. NB:- For the subjects of Literary and Cultural History of Ancient India and Comparative Philology the basis qualification shall be atleast a second class Master Degree in Sanskrit or Acharya Degree in any subject in place of Acharya." 10. In the three writ petitions decided by the learned Single Judge the eligibility of Ratan Lal Dadhich and Chandi Prasad for Principal of Acharya College was also challenged but this was not accepted by the learned Single Judge. 11. The learned Single Judge referring to the Rules of 1966 and the Rules of 1977 held that the appellant Kailash Chaturvedi, who was M.A. Hindi Second Division continued to be a lecturer in Hindi till 1975. He was promoted under the 1966 Rules as Professor, Hindi even after this subject had ceased to exist for Acharya classes and he was not promoted as Professor in any of the subjects of Acharya Classes. He could not have been the Head of Acharya Department, as before becoming so he should have to his credit First Class Acharya Degree, with five years teaching experience in this subject. He could not have been the Head of Acharya Department, as before becoming so he should have to his credit First Class Acharya Degree, with five years teaching experience in this subject. Though he had acquired the degree of Acharya in Sahitya in Second Division in 1967 and had passed M.A. Sanskrit in IIIrd Division, but he was not having the. experience of any of the subjects of Acharya Course. Later he was transferred in the year 1973 from the post of Professor, Hindi, Maharaja Sanskrit College, Jaipur to Sanskrit College, Udaipur as Professor in Sanskrit History and for this post he was not eligible because he was M.A. in Sanskrit in IIIrd Division and not second division which was the minimum qualification. The contention advanced on behalf of Kailash Chaturvedi that either the Master's Degree in third class or the Acharya Degree in Second Class could be sufficient qualification was-not accepted. It was held that for the subject of Literary and Cultural History of Ancient India and Comparative Philology a Masters Degree in Second Class was the basic qualification. It was held that he was not eligible to teach the subject of Sanskrit History at the Sanskrit College Udaipur. Referring to Rule 2 (1c) of the 1977 Rules, it was held that Shri Chaturvedi was never promoted as Professor in Sanskrit History in the regular of promotion and not continuously worked on that post regular recruitment because he was never recruited to that post, and had not acquired the requisite experience. In the year 1975 he was appointed Professor under the 1966 Rules and it was only on March 20, 1980 that he was declared surplus and absorbed from the post of Professor Hindi to the post of Professor Sanskrit, History and the experience gained by him on the post of Sanskrit History could not be counted. The vacancies for which the DPC was held were as on 1st April, 1979 and by this time, the appellant Kailash Chaturvedi had not been absorbed as Professor of Sanskrit History and as such he was not eligible for consideration to promotion to the post 'Head of Acharya College. Referring to the Rajasthan Civil Services (absorbed on the Surplus for as) Rules 1969 it was held that the same was not applicable to persons who were to be absorbed after 1969. 12. Referring to the Rajasthan Civil Services (absorbed on the Surplus for as) Rules 1969 it was held that the same was not applicable to persons who were to be absorbed after 1969. 12. Reference was made to an earlier decision in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 503 of 1977 decided on August 7, 1978, wherein it was held that Kailash Chaturvedi was not eligible to function as Principal of Shastri College because being a Professor in Hindi and Hindi not being a subject in Acharya College, he was not eligible for promotion to the post of Principal Sahitya College. The matter in issue was that he did not possess the minimum educational qualifications a5 required by Ordinance 65 (xi) (J): 13. The learned counsel for the appellant Kailash Chaturvedi has contended that besides the qualifications and experience which have been mentioned in page 4 of the judgment, the appellant is also having the Degree of Acharya in Sahitya in First Division which was acquired by him in the year 1972. According to him this qualification should also be considered and according to the rules of 1966 he became eligible for promotion to the post of Principal charya College from the post of Professor Acharya Classes as he had three years teaching experience. It is contended that his transfer in the year 1973 to a Sanskrit College Udaipur on the post of Professor in Sanskrit History could not be challenged in the year 1980 even collaterally. It is contended that the transfer of the appellant as Professor to Udaipur should be counted as experience as this transfer is under Rule 20 of the R.S.R. and this experience can be included in, the definition of Service under Rules 1(k) of the 1977 Rules. According to him, transfer is an exigency of service and when he is transferred to a post where there was a subject to teach he could be posted there. According to him' this transfer cannot be allowed to be challenged 'even collaterally at this late stage as the challenge at that time would -have resulted in his moving away from that post and joining some other post. Referring to the note-benefit under Ordinance 65 it is contended that if the amendment of 1979 results in changing the earlier provision then the provision prior to 1979 should not be made applicable. 14. Referring to the note-benefit under Ordinance 65 it is contended that if the amendment of 1979 results in changing the earlier provision then the provision prior to 1979 should not be made applicable. 14. The non-petitioners have supported the judgment of the learned Single Judge and have contended that the vacancies for the post of Principal Acharya College were to be considered as on 1.4.1979 and at that time the appellant Kailash Chaturvedi was not having the prescribed qualification and was not eligible for consideration. 15. We have considered the contentions raised on behalf of both the sides. The contentions on behalf of Kailash Chaturvedi that he acquired the degree of Acharya in Sahitya in First Division in the year 1972 cannot be accepted for the purpose of these proceedings as the same was not entered in his record. Had he been a first class Acharya there was no question of his being ineligible at the time when the earlier writ petition was decided. This question of fact cannot be looked into in this special appeal and the learned Single Judge has also not considered this . Rule 2 (k) of 1977 Rules reads as under: 2 (k) : "Service" or "experience" whenever prescribed these Rules as a condition for promotion within the Service from on category to another or to senior posts in the case of persons holding such posts in substantive capacity shall include the period for which the person has continuously worked on such posts after regular recruitment and shall also include the experience gained by officiating, temporary or ad hoc appointment, if such appointment is in the regular line of promotion and was not of stop-gap or fortutious nature or invalid under any law and does not involve suppression of any senior official except when such supersession was either due to. want of prescribed academic and other qualifications, unfitness or the default of the senior official concerned or when such ad hoc or urgent temporary appointment was in accordance with seniority-cum-merit." Note:- Absence during services to training and deputation etc. which are treated as 'duty' under the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951, shall also be counted as service for computing minimum experience or service required for promotion."' 16. which are treated as 'duty' under the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951, shall also be counted as service for computing minimum experience or service required for promotion."' 16. For gaining experience under this provision, a person has to held a post in substantive capacity or has to work on such post after regular recruitment and he shall gain experience by officiating, temporary or ad hoc appointment if such appointment is in the regular line of promotion and was not of stop gap or fortuitous nature. The experience of Kailash Chaturvedi on the lower post was not in substantive capacity and at the same time it was not in the regular line of promotion as such his work on the post of Professor Sanskrit (History) could not be counted as experience gained by officiating or temporary appointment. His regular promotion was on the post of Professor in Hindi which subject ceased to be a subject for Acharya classes in 'the year 1970-71. His teaching experience from 1973 to 1980 when he was declared surplus and was absorbed from the post of Professor (Hindi) to the post of Professor Sanskrit (Hindi) cannot be counted for the purpose of his further promotion to the post of Principal of Acharya Classes as the same was not in the regular line of promotion. The writ petitioners have not directly challenged the transfer of Kailash Chaturvedi in the year 1973 to Sanskrit College Udaipur on the post of Professor Sanskrit (History); it has not been challenged on the ground that he was not qualified for that post; but the challenge is on the question whether the experience gained on the post of Professor in Sanskrit (History) can be counted for the purpose of eligibility for the post of Principal Acharya College. Legality of the transfer to Sanskrit College, Udaipur in the year 1973 is not to be consider, ' hit his absorption in the year 1980 on the post of Professor Sanskrit (History) is under challenge and this question could be considered for the purposes of deciding whether Kailash Chaturvedi gained the requisite experience or not and whether qualification wise he is eligible to be appointed to the post of Principal, Acharya College. He continued to be a Professor in Hindi till March, 1980 when he was absorbed on the post of Professor Sanskrit (History) and his experience uptil 1980 can be counted only on the post of Professor in Hindi and not on the post of Professor in Sanskrit History. 17. Referring to Ordinance 65 and the not a been it has been contended that the qualification that a person must possess in M.A. degree in Sanskrit in place of Acharya degree, cannot be provided for one subject only and there is no such condition for other subjects. It has also been contended that this was subsequently modified in July, 1979 and the earlier provision should not be given effect to. In D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 454/91, the validity of this provision has been challenged. This unamended Ordinance has been challenged after a long period of 11 years when the same is no longer in force. However, in the year 1979 when the vacancies of Head of Acharya Department and Principal Acharya College had fallen vacant, merely because of the subsequent modifications, it cannot be said that the earlier provision becomes inapplicable. 18. The scheme of Ordinance of 1965 may be looked into. Far the head of Acharya Department a person must possess (i) First Class Acharya Degree in the subject with five years' teaching experience of Shastri and/or Acharya Classes; or (ii) Second Class Acharya degree in the subject with five.years' experience of teaching, out of which at least three years' experience of teaching Achary A. Classes. This experience has been further relaxed in case of candidates who pases a recognised research degree. However, for the subject of Literary and Cultural History of Ancient India and Comparative Philology he must have possessed the Master of Arts degree in Sanskrit in place of Acharya. degree. The reason for laying down this condition appears to be that there is no Acharya degree in the subject of Literary and Cultural History of Ancient India and Comparative Philology. The general note (1) says that a person possessing both Acharya and M.A. degree shall be considered qualified to teach Shastri and Acharya Classes if he has passed either of them in second division, the experience of teaching remaining the same. The general note (1) says that a person possessing both Acharya and M.A. degree shall be considered qualified to teach Shastri and Acharya Classes if he has passed either of them in second division, the experience of teaching remaining the same. This general Note No. (1) will not over ride the note been because that is specifically for the subject Literary and Cultural History of Ancient India and Comparative Philology and this degree has to be either of first class or second class with teaching experience of five years. The petitioner in this case is M.A. Sanskrit in third division and cannot fall in either of the categories. No doubt he is Acharya in Sahitya in second division but the relaxation of either degree in second division cannot be said to be available for the subject of Literary and Cultural History of Ancient India and Comparative Philology. If it was the intention of the authorities to modify this provision, with earlier effect, then they could have attempted to do so but this was not done. As on 1.4.1979 Kailash Chaturvedi does not become eligible for head of Acharya of the subject of Sanskrit (History). It may be said that the modified version after 1979 is also not clear, but for this purpose of these appeals and writ petitions, the unamended provision alone has to be looked into. It can be said that the Ordinance 65 as it stood prior to 1979, is not invalid in any manner and specific provisions for the subject of Literary and Cultural History of Ancient India and Comparative Philology cannot amount to any discrimination because this is not a subject in which one could obtain a degree of Acharya whereas in all other subjects one can obtain Acharya degree. 19. Learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on the following decisions. The same are reproduced but it can be said that the situation in the present case is not similar to the cases which have been cited and the same cannot' be said to be applicable. 20. In Post Graduate Institute and others v. Dr. D.B. Dilwari and others, 1988 (Supp.) SCC 355 , it was held that prescribing qualifications is the work of expert body and court would be slow to impose its opinion in the matter. 20. In Post Graduate Institute and others v. Dr. D.B. Dilwari and others, 1988 (Supp.) SCC 355 , it was held that prescribing qualifications is the work of expert body and court would be slow to impose its opinion in the matter. The allegation was that qualifications prescribed for Professor in a super speciality in medicine was tailored to suit a particular candidate. This action was hasty. Instead of pronouncing any view the Supreme Court asked the authority to refix the qualifications in accordance with procedure laid down by Act, Rules, Regulations and Standing Orders. In Roshanlal Tondon and Kunj Behari v. U.O.I. and Ors., AIR 1967 SC 1889 a notification was issued by Railway Board for absorption of direct recruits and promotees in one cadre. The portion of Notification which gave favourable treatment to direct recruits in regard to promotion was held to be discriminatory. Similarly in S.M. Pandit and others. v. State of Gujarat and Others, AIR 1972 SC 252 it was held that directly recruited Mamletdars and promotees both have same designation, same pay scale and same functions and their posts are interchangable. The form one class and cannot be discriminated in the matter of further promotion. S.L. Sachdev and others v. U.O.I. and Ors., AIR 1981 SC 411 and State of Mysore v. Krishna Murthy and Others, AIR 1973 SC 1146 are to the same effect. 21. The appointment of Chandi Prasad as Principal Acharya College was challenged by Ratan Lai Dadhich but at the time of arguments, before the learned Single Judge he gave up this challenge and confirmed the challenge to Kailash Chaturvedi alone as Chandi Prasad had retired by that time. Even Vasudeo Shastri in his writ petition did not. seek to challenge the appointment of Chandi Prasad. Shri Moti Lal Joshi challenged the appointment of Chandi Prasad as well as Ratan Lal Dadhich as Principal Acharya College on the ground that they did not possess sufficient experience. The challenge by Moti Lai was not accepted by the learned Single Judge because Ratan Lai Dadhich was junior to Vasudeo Shastri and in the cadre of Lecturers Chandi Prasad was senior to Ratan Lal Dadhich. In the reply filed by the State, for Ratan Lal it was written that he had the requisite qualifications and experience. As Chandi Prasad had already retired the case was not considered in detail. In the reply filed by the State, for Ratan Lal it was written that he had the requisite qualifications and experience. As Chandi Prasad had already retired the case was not considered in detail. Ratan Lal claimed that if DPC had not for considering the vacancies of 1972 he would have been senior to Chandi Prasad and would have been promoted as Principal. He was not allowed to make this claim in the year 1980. Chandi Prasad was appointed on temporary basis as on Professor in Sahitya in 1975 and made permanent in 1977. He therefore, had the requisite experience for being considered for the post of Principal, Acharya, Col 22. So far as Ratan Lal is concerned, he was not promoted as Principal Acharya College against the vacancies of the year 1979. The writ petitioner Motilal wapts that he shall be declared ineligible for purpose of consideration. A look at the qualifications and experience of Ratan Lal Dadhich would show that he possesses the requisite qualification and also teaching experience of more than five years out of which more than three years is of Acharya Classes. 23. In view of the above discussions, we are in agreement with the findings of the learned Single Judge and there is no reason to take a different view. The three appeals of Kailash Chaturvedi and the writ petition filed by him as well as the 'appeal of Motilal Joshi are all dismissed. The interim order dated 16th January, 1991 shall also stands vacated.Appeals Dismissed. *******