JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. In this case petitioner is claiming service benefit right from his initial appointment in parent Department - Rajasthan State Co-operative Oilseed Growers Federation Limited (Tilam Sangh). Petitioner has also prayed for quashing Annex.5 dated 19/5/003 and Annex.7 dated 13/1/2006, whereby, he was denied selection scale as provided under Finance Department Notification dated 25/1/1992. 3. The case of petitioner is that he was appointed in 1993 on the post of Shift Incharge in Tilam Sangh. Thereafter, in the year 1995 he was sent on deputation to the respondent Department and later on when posts of Junior Project Officers were advertised by the respondents vide Annex.3 dated 9.9.99, petitioner was absorbed on the said post in the pay scale of 5500-9000 in the respondent Department vide order dated 11/12/2001(Annex.4). Petitioner is claiming selection scale on the basis of length of service right from his initial appointment in Tilam Sangh w.e.f. 27/8/1993. It is also prayed that at least respondents may be directed to calculate his service period for grant of selection scale from the date when he joined the respondent department on deputation instead of counting his service w.e.f. the date of absorption i.e.11/12/2001. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that in the whole service tenure at least an employee is entitled for two promotions, therefore, in view of the fact that petitioner was not granted any promotion, he is entitled for selection scale after 09 years of service while taking into account his initial appointment w.e.f. 27/8/1993, the date when he was appointed as Foreman in Tilam Sangh. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that after absorption in the respondent department, petitioner made representation for grant of selection scale but his claim has been rejected vide Annex.7 by the respondents, which is illegal and contrary to basic principle of law because for the purpose of granting selection scale the services are required to be reckoned from the date of initial appointment but it has not been done in the present case and petitioner has been denied the benefit while considering his case from the date of absorption, therefore, denial of selection scale is illegal and have no foundation to stand before eye of law. 5. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents while inviting attention towards reply argued that service conditions are required to be governed as per terms of order of appointment. The present employer after due selection has absorbed the petitioner on the post of Junior Project Officer. Initially petitioner was appointed on substantive basis as Foreman (Mechanical ) in Tilam Sangh from where he was sent on deputation and he worked for sometime. Thereafter, pursuant to advertisement for the post of Junior Project Officer, petitioner filed an application and upon consideration of his candidature, he was found suitable for absorption, consequently he was absorbed vide order dated 11/12/2001 (Annex.4). Upon perusal of order Annex.4 it is evident that it was made clear to the petitioner that his seniority will be reckoned from the date of appointment and following condition was incorporated in the order dated 11/12/2001 (Annex.4): " mijksDr vf/kdkfj;ksa@deZpkfj;ksa }kjk buds bu mDr inksa ij vfHkdj.k esa dk;Zxzg.k djus dh frfFk ls budh lsok;sa vUrfyZ;u (absorb) dh tkrh gSa rFkk bu ij vUrfyZ;u gksus dh fnukad ls vfHkdj.k ds lsok fu;e ykxw gksaus ,oa rn~uqlkj gh ofj"Brk dk fu/kkZj.k fd;k tk;sxkA blls iwoZ budh tek fuf/k;ksa dh okilh] gLrkUrj.k bR;kfn ds fy, vf/kdj.k fdlh Hkh izdkj ls mRrjnk;h ugha gksxkA " 6. Meaning thereby, petitioner has accepted the terms and condition of the appointment order, therefore, he is not entitled to any relief from present employer. Further it is submitted that in the parent department Tilam Sangh petitioner was working as Foreman which is lower cadred post and the present post of Junior Project Officer is higher in the pay scale of Rs.5500-9000, meaning thereby, petitioner is not entitled to get any benefit for the services rendered by him in Tilam Sangh for the purpose of granting selection scale as per para 3 and 4 of the Notification dated 25/1/1992. Therefore, it is prayed by learned counsel for the respondent that petitioner is not entitled to any relief and obviously for service benefits in the respondent department, petitioner is entitled only w.e.f. 11/12/2001, the date on which he was absorbed. 7. I have considered the rival submissions. Therefore, it is prayed by learned counsel for the respondent that petitioner is not entitled to any relief and obviously for service benefits in the respondent department, petitioner is entitled only w.e.f. 11/12/2001, the date on which he was absorbed. 7. I have considered the rival submissions. In this case admittedly petitioner was substantively appointed after selection in the present respondent department vide order dated 11/12/2001 and at the time of providing appointment after selection it was made clear in the appointment order itself that petitioner will be entitled for seniority w.e.f. the date of appointment. It is also observed that present employer will not be responsible to pay any service benefit for the past services rendered by the petitioner in Tilam Sangh, therefore, in my opinion, the service conditions of petitioner are to be governed as per the terms of appointment order, therefore, in my opinion petitioner can claim his service benefits w.e.f. the date when he was absorbed by the present employer. 8. In this view of the matter, I find no ground to interfere in the order passed by the respondents for denial of selection scale and not calculating the past services rendered by petitioner before his selection in the present department. 9. However, petitioner is not precluded from filing representation before the respondents for grant of seniority and other benefits like selection scale. If any such representation will be filed by the petitioner then it is expected that respondents will consider the same sympathetically because petitioner has rendered the services in Tilam Sangh right from 1993 and absorbed on the post of Junior Project Officer in the office of present employer. 10. With these observations, this writ petition is dismissed.Writ Petition dismissed. *******