JUDGMENT 1. - Principal relief that has been asked for by the petitioner in the instant writ petition is in respect of stepping up of his pay to be made equal to his junior respondents Nos. 3, 4 and 5. 2. Contextual facts depict that the petitioner is a member of Scheduled Caste and came to be appointed as Junior Engineer prior to respondents 3, 4 and 5. Vide order dated June 4, 1976, the respondents 3, 4 and 5 were promoted. The petitioner immediately lodged protest on the ground that the respondents 3, 4 and 5 were junior to him and they ought not to have been promoted prior to the petitioner, The respondent RSEB thereafter also promoted the petitioner vide order dated August 12, 1976 along with respondent No. 6 Nand Kishore Rathore, who stood at S.No. 228 in the seniority list dated August 1, 1980. It was the duty of the respondent RSEB to promote the petitioner with effect from June 4, 1976 but he was given promotion with effect from August 12, 1976. The petitioner submitted another representation for effecting promotion with effect from June 4, 1976, but it was not decided. Junior persons have been paid pay scale of the higher post and thereafter its revised pay scale but the petitioner has not been fixed in the revised pay scale. On the representation of the petitioner dated March 30, 1977, the Assistant Accounts Officer RSEB, sought clarification from the Deputy Secretary (Rules and Finance) Jaipur vide his letter dated July 12, 1977 but that also proved of no avail. The petitioner reminded the respondent RSEB to step up his pay and determine the correct seniority list but neither the seniority has been determined properly nor the pay of the petitioner has been stepped up. Therefore the petitioner served notice for demand of justice and instituted the instant writ petition seeking relief for his stepping up his pay and to assign correct seniority list in the seniority list of the Assistant Engineers. 3. The respondent RSEB submitted reply to the writ petition stating therein that pay of the petitioner cannot be stepped up as the petitioner did not join in spite of his order of promotion on August 12, 1976 before the Revised Pay Scale Rules were made applicable. 3. The respondent RSEB submitted reply to the writ petition stating therein that pay of the petitioner cannot be stepped up as the petitioner did not join in spite of his order of promotion on August 12, 1976 before the Revised Pay Scale Rules were made applicable. Therefore he cannot be said to be at par qua those who were existing employee working in the cadre as on 1st Sept. 1976. The petitioner in compliance of the order of promotion joined on September 3, 1976 i.e. after September 1, 1976, therefore he cannot be said to be an existing employee as on September 1, 1976 and he is not entitled to be fixed in respect of fixation in the revised new Pay Scale Rules, 1976. The respondents 3, 4 and 5 were promoted vide order dated June 4, 1976 as Assistant Engineer, therefore they were existing employees as on Sept. 1, 1976 and they were rightly considered under the Revised Pay Scale Rules. It has been further averred that the seniority is not the sole criteria for promotion. After due consideration of the candidature urgent temporary appointments were made by the appointing authority and the representation made by the petitioner was of no significance. Urgent temporary appointment does not confer any right and neither affects the seniority of the employee working in the cadre. Therefore the grievance of the to petitioner is highly unjustified and he is not entitled to step up of his pay. 4. The petitioner submitted rejoinder to the reply and prayed that he is entitled to relief sought in the writ petition. 5. It has been averred that the petitioner's record was throughout outstanding and he has never been communicated any adverse entry. It is beyond the understanding that what matter had persuaded the appointing authority in not giving the appointment to the petitioner on June 4, 1976 while junior persons to him were promoted. Seniority cannot be ignored even in the case of consideration for promotion on the criteria of seniority cum merit. Though urgent appointment may not confer right of senior person but it certainly entitles him for other benefits like monetary benefits and working experience etc. Seniority cannot be ignored even in the case of consideration for promotion on the criteria of seniority cum merit. Though urgent appointment may not confer right of senior person but it certainly entitles him for other benefits like monetary benefits and working experience etc. The respondent RSEB had cured illegality committed by it on June 4, 1976 while promoting the petitioner on August 12, 1976, but illegality in respect of stepping up of pay equivalent to the pay which the junior persons have been receiving by virtue of their promotion vide order dated June 4, 1976 was not rectified. It was further averred that the respondent RSEB had not stipulated joining time in its order dated August 12, 1976. Therefore the important fact which remains for consideration is that the petitioner was promoted vide order dated August 12, 1976, he became an existing employee with effect from August 12, 1976, and as such he is entitled to receive his pay fixation in the revised pay scale of 1976. That apart, the petitioner was not relieved by his Controlling Officer, as such there was no question of joining earlier than September 3, 1976. The petitioner was given only 7 days joining time after he was relieved by the Controlling Officer, therefore it was not the fault of the petitioner if he joined the services on September 3, 1976 on the post of Assistant Engineer. 6. I have reflected over the rival submissions and carefully scanned the material on record. Admittedly the petitioner was accorded seniority over the junior persons who are respondents 4 to 6 in the writ petition. An additional affidavit has been filed by the petitioner with the averment that respondent RSEB had adopted the Revised Pay Scale Rules in February, 1977 vide order dated Feb. 22, 1977 which came to be issued on March 8, 1977. Therefore it is evident that the respondent RSEB had not adopted the Revised Pay Scale Rules before issuance of order dated March 8, 1977. The said pay scale rules were adopted retrospectively. The petitioner could not join the duties of Assistant Engineer on or before September 1, 1976 as he was not relieved by the Controlling Officer. Undeniably the respondents 4 to 6, who are junior to the petitioner have been getting higher pay. The said pay scale rules were adopted retrospectively. The petitioner could not join the duties of Assistant Engineer on or before September 1, 1976 as he was not relieved by the Controlling Officer. Undeniably the respondents 4 to 6, who are junior to the petitioner have been getting higher pay. In the additional affidavit the petitioner also incorporated order dated June 20, 1974 issued by the respondent RSEB in support of his claim of stepping up of his pay which was so in existence on the date when the petitioner joined as Assistant Engineer. A look at the said order demonstrates that the Chairman RSEB in consultation with the Accounts and Finance was pleased to order that where a Board employee's pay was fixed at a lower stage than the pay of a Board employee, junior to him, by application of any of the Rules, the pay of the senior employee may be stepped up to a figure equal to the pay as fixed for the junior Board employee. It appears that the petitioner already raised the grievance in respect of his fixation firstly in old pay scale by stepping up of pay equal to his juniors and thereafter his fixation in the revised pay scale and the Accounts Officer of the RSEB had opined that since the RSEB had not adopted the new pay scale vide its order dated September 12, 1977, therefore by introducing the pay scale retrospectively the petitioner cannot be to deprived of fruit in the garb that he joined duties on September 3, 1976. Undisputably, on September 3, 1976 the old Pay Scale Rules were in existence and on the said date New Pay Scale Rules were not adopted by the RSEB therefore the petitioner's fixation ought to have been made in the Old Pay Scale Rules by stepping up his pay equal to his juniors with effect from June 4, 1976. 7. In view of what I have discussed here-in-above, the writ petition stands partly allowed and the respondent RSEB is directed to comply with its Order dated June 20, 1974 and step up the pay of the petitioner equal to his juniors i.e. the respondents 3 to 6 under the Rajasthan Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules 1961 which were in existence on September 3, 1976 with effect from June 4, 1976. Costs easy.Writ petition partly allowed. *******