JUDGMENT 1. - By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief : "(a) By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the Respondents be directed to give benefit of Selection Grade to the petitioners on their completion of 9, 18 & 27 years of service in the cadre in pursuance of Govt.'s order dated 25.1.1992 and after giving the benefit of Selection Grade their pay fixation be also revised; (b) the costs of the writ petition be also awarded to the petitioners; (c) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may feel just and convenient be also awarded in favour of the petitioners." 2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submit that the petitioners joined in the services of the Corporation on various dates, but they were appointed in regular cadre w.e.f. 31st August, 1986. That the Government of Rajasthan, Finance (G.2) Department vide order No. F.20(1)FD (Gr.2)/92 dated 25.1.1992 prescribed the Selection Grade for employees in Class-IV, Ministerial and Subordinate Services and those holding isolated posts and fixation of pay in the Selection Grade on completion of 9, 18 & 27 years service respectively with a view to provide relief to such employees who could not be promoted during the said period and accordingly for the benefit of Selection Grade the service of nine, eighteen or twenty seven years as the case may be, shall be counted from the date of first appointment in the existing cadre/service in accordance with the provisions contained in the Recruitment Rules. The respondent Corporation has adopted Government Circular dated 25th January, 1992 and vide his (sic) order dated 12.1.2000 has decided to grant benefit of Selection Grades of 9 years, 18 years and 27 years to its employees from the date of their regular appointment, i.e. the date of joining. The said decision has been taken in pursuance to the directions of this Court dated 22.1.1992 given in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 741/1990. The petitioners have also completed 9 years service in their cadre. The said decision has been taken in pursuance to the directions of this Court dated 22.1.1992 given in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 741/1990. The petitioners have also completed 9 years service in their cadre. But till this date they have not been given any benefit in pursuance of Government's order dated 25.1.1992 and in this regard, the petitioners have made several requests to the concerned officers and every time, the petitioners have been told that their case is going to be considered.When the respondents did not give the benefit, they filed a writ petition bearing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5323/2001 (Lala Ram & 23 Others v. RIICO & Others), this Court on 12.4.2002 , while disposing of the writ petition passed the following orders : "The petitioners may approach the appropriate authority raising their grievance regarding grant of selection scale on completion of 9, 18 & 27 years of service and if such approach is made to the appropriate authority the appropriate authority shall adjudicate upon and decide the grievance raised by the petitioners within a period of 15 days of the receipt of representation. The petitioners may submit relevant papers before the appropriate authority. The writ petition stands disposed of." 3. Accordingly, the petitioners submitted their representation on 7th May, 2002 alongwith the certified copy of the order of this Court dated 12.4.2002 requested for grant of selection grade considering their entitlement and except the present petitioners all other petitioners involved in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5323/2001 have been given the benefit of Selection Grade and pay fixation. 4. It is submitted that on making inquiry, the petitioners were verbally informed that their matter has been forwarded to the BIFR, thus the respondent Corporation had adopted pick and choose and the similarly situated persons have been granted the benefit of selection grade whereas the petitioners are being deprived without any justification. 5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Respondents submitted that the Corporation following the rules and regulations of the State Government, but the work & proceedings are run by the Working Committee of the Board of the Corporation and the Working Committee is solely capable to make any decision in the interest of the Corporation. 5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Respondents submitted that the Corporation following the rules and regulations of the State Government, but the work & proceedings are run by the Working Committee of the Board of the Corporation and the Working Committee is solely capable to make any decision in the interest of the Corporation. The petitioners are designated as Pump Driver Grade-II from Pump Driver (Helper)-II and after that they were promoted on the post of Pump Driver Grade-III by the office order dated 26.6.82. 6. Accordingly, regular promotion, re-designation and other benefits have been given to the petitioners from time to time and now they will be considered, if they fulfill the essential eligibility under the garb of office order dated 14.7.1988. 7. The Corporation is following the Rules and Regulation of the State Government, but the work and proceedings are run by the Working Committee of the Board of the Corporation and the Working Committee is solely capable to take appropriate decision in good interest of the Corporation. Thus, he denied the alleged policy of pick and choose. 8. No rejoinder has been filed by the petitioners to the reply. However, they opposed the grounds taken by the respondent Corporation in their reply. 9. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents and also gone through the record of the case which available before me. 10. The petitioners have also placed reliance upon the decision in case (Smt. Anamma Chako v. State of Rajasthan and with six Others reported in 1998 WLR (Raj.) p.424 wherein the learned Single Judge held as under : "The impugned action in withdrawing the selection grade or ordering the recovery from the petitioners is not legal and cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. The learned Judge, therefore, quashed the impugned action on the part of the State Government. The learned Judge has also made it clear that no recovery shall be made from the petitioners and in case any amount has been recovered because of the impugned actions, the amount shall be refunded back to the petitioners. The learned Judge, in coming to the conclusion has placed reliance on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2079/87 Habbibur Rehman v. State of Rajasthan ." 11. The learned Judge, in coming to the conclusion has placed reliance on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2079/87 Habbibur Rehman v. State of Rajasthan ." 11. Further, in a similarly situated case, Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 276/2000, while upholding the judgment passed by Hon'ble Single Judge in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2939/99 held as under : "We are in entire agreement with the opinion expressed by the learned Single Judge in the case of Smt. Snehlata Mathur v. State (supra) and as upheld by the Division Bench of this Court. The judgment rendered by the Single Bench and also by the Division Bench, in the above case, have been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court while dismissing the SLP at the admission stage. We also fully endorse the view expressed by the Division Bench in, Habibur Rahman's case (supra) and the interpretation given by the Division Bench. Hon'ble Division Bench in Para 16 of its judgment held as under : 16. The withdrawal of selection grade, in our, opinion, is not proper. The petitioners in all these cases shall be entitled for grant of selection grade and after having granted the selection grade, in accordance with the instructions issued by the Department, the selection grade will be issued without issuing any show cause notice to any of the petitioners after five years of such sanction. As rightly pointed out by the learned Single Judge in the case of Smt. Annamma Chako v. State & Ors. (supra), as it involves the basic rights, involving civil consequences, the Selection Grade could not have been withdrawn except by issuing a show cause notice. We, therefore, held that the action of the respondents was violative of principles of natural justice and could not be sustained in the eyes of law. We make it clear that now as we have quashed the impugned action of the Government in each, the respondents are not permitted to initiate recovery proceedings. In case, any recovery has already been made, the recovered amount shall be refunded to the petitioner concerned. It is brought to our notice that on account of the impugned circular, the pay scale has been reduced to some of the petitioners. In case, any recovery has already been made, the recovered amount shall be refunded to the petitioner concerned. It is brought to our notice that on account of the impugned circular, the pay scale has been reduced to some of the petitioners. In view of the order, now passed by us in these batch of writ petitions, the pay scale is also to be revised to those teachers whose pay structure has been reduced in view of the impugned circular and the arrears may be paid to the concerned petitioners within three months from the receipt of certified copy of this order. With the above observations, all the writ petitions are allowed and the impugned circular dated 27.7.1995 is quashed." 12. The learned counsel for the petitioners has also placed reliance upon the judgment of this Court passed by the Division Bench of this Court dated 26.4.2001. 13. The respondents have submitted that the petitioners were re-designated as Pump Driver Grade-II in the grade of 820-10-850-15-1000-20-1200-25-1400-30-1420 with effect from 24.11.1986 vide order dated 12.10.1987 and thus, it is clear that they were not entitled to get 1st Selection Scale. In other words, according to respondent placing the petitioners from Pump Driver III to II vide order dated 12.10.1987 amounts to promotion. But in my opinion, re-designation cannot be considered as promotion. While re-designating the petitioners, there was no element of promotion. 14. In view of the above discussion, this writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to give benefit of Selection Grade to the petitioners on their completion of 9, 18 & 27 years of service in the cadre. The respondents are further directed to give benefits of Selection Grade and thereafter their pay-scale be fixed in the respective Selection Grade alongwith arrears, if any, within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of this order.No order as to costs.Writ Petition Allowed. *******