JUDGMENT 1. - Instant bunch of petitions since involves a common question, hence being disposed of by the present order. 2. Counsel for petitioners jointly submits that the controversy raised in the instant petitions was initially examined and decided by learned Single Bench of this Court in CWP-4119 of 2009, Ramjeet Singh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. , and other identical petitions decided on 30.06.2009 and in para 7 & 8 observed as under:- "I have gone through the record of the writ petitions and considered the rival submissions of the parties. In my view, the letter dated 19.01.2009 clearly reveals that the revised scheme is to be implemented instead of old scheme, hence, mere change of the scheme will not result in unemployment and fresh selection. However, the petitioners cannot claim the wages of the intervening period on account of non allotment of the budget. The action of the respondents envisages the impugned orders of termination of the present petitioners is declared illegal and the petitioners are allowed to continue on their respective posts till the scheme of "Lok Talim" is implemented. However, they will be entitled for continuity in service but not entitled to fixed remuneration for the intervening period in case the scheme of "Lok Talim" is implemented." 3. Against the order of learned Single Judge of this Court dated 30.06.2009 DB Civil Special Appeals (517/2010 and other connected appeals) were preferred by the State of Rajasthan which have been dismissed by common judgment dated 01.10.2010 and the relief granted by the learned Single Judge has been modified and finally observed as under:- "To the recourse proposed by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, counsel for the appellants has no objection. Hence, the order of the Single Bench is accordingly modified to the extent that it would be open to the appellants to screen the candidate s for the purposes of ensuring that they are holding the requisite qualification under the new scheme and adjustment of such incumbent shall be made at other centre in order to ensure the composition as per the new scheme of one man and one woman candidate at one centre is maintained and services of only those candidate s be discontinued who are not qualified or it is not possible to accommodate them. However, while doing so, no discrimination be made between the incumbents and rule of last come first go shall be adhered to." 4. Counsel for petitioners submits that in light of the order of the learned Single Bench with the modification made by the Division Bench the present bunch of petitions may be disposed of. 5. Counsel for respondents has not controverted however further submits that candidature of the petitioners will be considered only in terms of the modification made by the Division Bench of this Court in the judgment referred to supra. 6. It certainly goes without saying that once the modification has been made by the Division Bench of this Court the Government is under obligation to follow the directions of the Division Bench referred to supra. 7. Consequently, all these writ petitions in light of the order passed by learned Single Bench with the modification made by the Division Bench of this Court stand disposed of. The petitioners in the present bunch of petitions mutatis mut is are entitled to the same relief which has been granted by the Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 01.10.2010 (supra). No cost.Relief Granted by Division Bench Maintained. *******