JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The appellant was appointed as Amin in the Settlement Department on temporary basis on October 18, 1972. A show cause notice was issued to him on June 20, 1973 as to why his services be not terminated. On a representation being made to the Chairman, Board of Revenue, the appellant was appointed on the post of Patwari on September 13, 1973 and was subsequently transferred to Jaipur District in 1978. Since the appellant did not pass the Patwar Examination, a show cause notice was again issued to him on June 14, 1984, and his services were directed to be placed at the disposal of the Board of Revenue by Collector, Jaipur, vide order dated February 8, 1985. But as there was no Vacancy the Settlement Commissioner did not take the appellant back and ultimately the Collector vide order dated January 15, 1987, reverted the appellant on the post of Class IV. Against the order dated January 15, 1987, appeal was preferred by the appellant before the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal on December 13, 1987 and the appellant continuing on the post of Patwari by virtue of the interim order. The learned Single Judge, however, disposed of the writ petition on August 29, 1997. The said order has been assailed by the appellant in the instant Special Appeal. The Division Bench of this Court presided over by Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.P. Naolekar (as His Lordship then was) passed the following order on December 9, 1999 : "Till disposal of the Special appeal, operation of the order of learned Single Judge shall remain stayed. Similarly the order of reversion dated 27.5.1999 shall also remain stayed. The applicant shall be permitted to work as Patwari." 3. An application under Article 226(3) of the. Constitution was moved by the State of Rajasthan but it was dismissed vide order dated September 21, 2000. It appears that the appellant has worked on the post of Patwari for a period of more than 30 years. The only hurdle that comes in the way of appellant is that he did not pass Patwar Examination. Constitution was moved by the State of Rajasthan but it was dismissed vide order dated September 21, 2000. It appears that the appellant has worked on the post of Patwari for a period of more than 30 years. The only hurdle that comes in the way of appellant is that he did not pass Patwar Examination. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the State of Punjab and another v. Shamlal Murari and another, AIR 1976 Supreme Court 1977 , in a similar situation in Para No. 4 indicated as under : "Right away, we my indicate that we are not impressed with the State's contention that the failure to pass the departmental test by the Government servant concerned, after having put in more than two decades of service can not stand in the way of his enjoying the benefits of increment, etc. particularly because he had been accorded exemption. Passing petty tests after a petrifying length of dull official service is an odd insistence except in important levels of work." 4. It was further held by their Lordships that after all, Courts are to do justice, not to wreck this end product on technicalities. At this juncture it would be useful to incorporate rule 4(ii) of the Rajasthan Land Revenue (Land Record Rule) 1957, which reads as under : "(ii) a person who has worked as a patwari under the State Government for not less than fifteen years and whose confidential reports are found to be satisfactory, who has appeared at two Patwar Examinations and failed and who is above forty years of age may be exempted from passing the Patwar Examination. 5. This proviso is squarely applicable to the appellant. 6. For these reasons, we allow the instant appeal and set-aside the impugned judgment of learned Single Judge as well as the impugned orders of Tribunal and Collector. There shall be no order as to costs.Order alongwith judgment of single judge set aside. *******