ASOPA, J. ( 1 ) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner. ( 2 ) SUBMISSION of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the experience of the petitioner has not been considered while considering his case for selection to the post of Probodhak for the reason that the departmental representative was not present in the selection process. He further submits that teaching experience for the purpose of direct recruitment gained in the supervisory capacity in any recognized educational institution has to be taken into consideration as per the definition of "teaching experience" given in the first part of Rule (2k) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Prabodhak Service rules, 2008, the second part of same Rule (2k) relating to "service" or "experience" gained after regular selection is applicable in case of promotion. Therefore, definition of service or experience given in second part is not applicable in case of interpreting the term experience in case of direct recruitment. ( 3 ) BEFORE proceeding further, Rule 2 (k) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj prabodhak Services Rules, 2008 reads as under:-"2 (k) "teaching Experience" for the purpose of direct recruitment includes the experience gained in supervisory capacity in any recognised educational institution of project; "service" or "experience" wherever prescribed in these rules as a condition for promotion from one service to another or within the service from one category to another or to senior posts, in the case of a person holding a lower post eligible for promotion to higher post shall include the period for which the person has continuously worked on such lower post after regular selection in accordance with rules promulgated. " ( 4 ) I have considered the aforesaid submissions and in my view the Rules are to be interpreted harmoniously and further the other rule of interpretation i. e. "ejusdam generis" is also to be taken into consideration on considering the aforesaid two principles. The interpretation of the Rule is that the experience for the purpose of direct recruitment of five years should also be gained after regular selection in the recognized institution. ( 5 ) SINCE in the present case, the departmental representative was not present in the case of the petitioner at the time of selection in the concerned recognized institution, therefore, the selection is in the nature of ad-hoc/temporary. The respondents have rightly not calculated the said experience. ( 5 ) SINCE in the present case, the departmental representative was not present in the case of the petitioner at the time of selection in the concerned recognized institution, therefore, the selection is in the nature of ad-hoc/temporary. The respondents have rightly not calculated the said experience. ( 6 ) I find no merit in the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner. ( 7 ) THE writ petition is dismissed accordingly as having no merits.