Honble MADAN, J.–Heard learned counsel for the parties at length. The case of the petitioner in short is that he was initially appointed as a class-IV employee after selection under the orders of the then Inspector of Schools, Bundi, Dated 12.11.1971 and had resumed his duties w.e.f. 15.11.1971 as a substantive appointee. He was confirmed on the said post w.e.f. 15.11.1972. (2). Thereafter the Government of Rajasthan vide its Notification dated 13.5.1973 declared the qualification of Prathma Hindi Sahitya Sammellan, Prayag, Allahabad, as a qualification equivalent to the High School Examination, passed from the State of Rajasthan. The petitioner submitted an application to the Depart-ment for giving him permission to appear in the aforesaid examination conducted by the Educational Institution at Allahabad so that he may obtain the necessary eligibility for being considered for promotion as L.D.C. The petitioner appeared in the aforesaid examination and was declared successful and was also issued a certificate to the said effect on 13.3.1984. Thereafter the petitioner submitted therelevant application through proper channel on 18.7.1985 in this regard. The said application was duly forwarded to the concerned authority. Thereafter the petitioner having failed to elicit any response from the respondents, submitted series of representations to the respondents but all to no effect. (3). On 27.5.1992, the petitioner received a communication from the respon-dents i.e. the District Education Officer, District Bundi, Rajasthan intimating the petitioner that his application was duly scrutinized but his candidature was not considered for promotion on the post of L.D.C., since the qualification of Prathma Hindi Sahitya Sammellan, Prayag, Allahabad was not recognised by the State Government of Rajasthan. (4). I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the relevant documents on the record as well as the reply to the writ petition filed by the respondents. (5). Similarly controversy had arisen for consideration of this Court in the matters of State of Rajasthan and Anr. vs. Shiv Karan and others (1) and in the matterof Jagdish Narayan vs. State of Rajasthan and Anrs. (2). (6). In the matter of Jagdish Narain vs. State of Rajasthan (supra), the petitioner/appellant had joined the service as class IV employee after qualifying examination on the relevant date. vs. Shiv Karan and others (1) and in the matterof Jagdish Narayan vs. State of Rajasthan and Anrs. (2). (6). In the matter of Jagdish Narain vs. State of Rajasthan (supra), the petitioner/appellant had joined the service as class IV employee after qualifying examination on the relevant date. At the time of promotion to the LDC from amongst class IV employees, notwithstanding the eligibility of the petitioner since he had morethan five years of service and had passed Hindi Rashtra Bhasha Parichaya School/Higher Secondary Ist Year, promotion to the post of LDC was denied to the appellant and since the grievance of the appellant-petitioner had not been ventilated, he approached this court in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The learned Single Judge by the impugned order dated 3.9.1993 dismi-ssed the writ petition of the appellant-petitioner on the ground that since the recognition awarded to Hindi Rashtriya Bhasha Parichaya examination had been withdrawn by the government order dated 28.6.1985, the case of the appellant-petitioner for promotion from class IV to LDC could not be considered. In appeal preferred before the learned Division Bench by the appellant, this court while allo-wing the said Appeal directed the respondents to consider the case of the appellant for promotion to the post of Lower Division Clerk with a direction that in case he is given promotion he shall be entitled to due seniority and other consequential benefits to which he was entitled in case, he would have been promoted on the date he was to be considered for promotion. (7). Similar controversy had arisen earlier before this court in the matter of State of Rajasthan vs. Shiv Karan & Others (Supra) in a Special Appeal before this court and the learned Division Bench while dismissing the Special Appeal, upheld the orders of the learned Single Judge by which the writ petitions were allowed and the appellants were directed to consider the respondent/petitioners candida-ture for promotional post of Lower Division Clerk. (8). I have examined the ratio of the aforesaid decisions of this Court and in my considered opinion the ratio of the aforesaid decisions are fully applicable to this case. (9). (8). I have examined the ratio of the aforesaid decisions of this Court and in my considered opinion the ratio of the aforesaid decisions are fully applicable to this case. (9). The Respondents are accordingly directed to consider the case of the peti- tioner for being promoted as L.D.C. w.e.f. the date his immediate junior recei-ved the promotion on the said post and to give the benefit of due seniority and other consequential benefits to which the petitioner would be entitled in the event of his receiving promotion on the said post in accordance with the Rules. (10). With the above observations the writ petition is consequently allowed and disposed of. Parties are left to bear their own costs.