JUDGMENT 1. - Admit. Mr. Vijay Bishnoi waive service of notice on the respondents. 2. The instant special appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 26.7.2000. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent writ- petitioner filed a writ petition stating inter alia that he joined the services appellant-Bank namely Bundi-Chittorgarh Kshetriya Gramin Bank as Officer by order dated 7.1.1985 on a probation of two years. The period of probation was extended for a period of six months by order dated 8.1.1987. It was further extended for a period of six months. He came to be confirmed by order dated 4.2.1988, In the seniority list he was placed at serial No. 6. However, In view of the Regulation 13(3) of the Bundi-Chittorgarh Kshetriya Gramin Bank (Staff) Service Regulations, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations of 1985) he was placed at serial No. 47. Sub-clause 3 of Rule 13 reads as follows:- "In the case of officer or an employee whose probation has been extended, his seniority shall be reckoned just below all the officers or employees, if any, recruited or promoted in the same batch along with him." 3. The petitioner relied upon a judgment of this court in Rajnesh Pareak v. Bhilwara-Ajmer Kshtriya Gramin Bank & Ors., reported in 1998(1) RLW 74 , by the said judgment the learned Single Judge of this court struck down the Regulation 13(3) of Regulation 1985, following the said decision the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and directed the appellant to reckon the seniority of the petitioner from the date of his initial appointment. 4. Mr. Anand Purohit learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the said decision of the learned Single Judge in Rajnesh Pareak's case does not hold a good law. In view of the Division Bench judgment of this court in Mewar Anchalik Gramin Bank, Udaipur & Ors. v. Mewar Anchalik Gramin Bank Officers Association dated 9.7.2002 it is held therein that a Clause 3 of Rule 13 does not suffer from the vice of discrimination and unreasonableness. In view of the finding, the court upheld the validity of the provisions of Clause (3) of Rule 13 of Regulation of 1985. v. Mewar Anchalik Gramin Bank Officers Association dated 9.7.2002 it is held therein that a Clause 3 of Rule 13 does not suffer from the vice of discrimination and unreasonableness. In view of the finding, the court upheld the validity of the provisions of Clause (3) of Rule 13 of Regulation of 1985. Thus, in our view, the seniority which has been prepared in accordance with the Rule 13(3) of the Regulation 1985 does not suffer from any illegality and is valid. 5. Consequently, this appeal is allowed, the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 26.7.2000 is set aside and the writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs.Appeal Allowed - Judgment of Single Judge Set Aside, Writ Petition Dismissed. *******