1. The Jammu & Kashmir Forest (Subordinate) Service Recruitment Rules 1991 (for short Rules of 1991), provide the method of recruitment in respect of the post of Range Officer, Grade — II in the following manner: "Class/Category Designation Scale Minimum Qualification for direct Method of recruitment recruitment IV Range Officer Grade-II 1235-2325 -- By promotion from class VI from amongst persons who are KFC and have five years service in that class VI Foresters . .. ” 2. The forester, who can be considered for being appointed by way of promotion on the post of Range Officer, Grade — II, thus, has to have KFC and five years service in Class VI. Writ petition is filed on the ground that the respondents, while ignoring the mandate of the Rules of 1991, have issued a tentative Seniority list which was notified vide No. PCCF/Ng/Estt/Seniority/Foresters/871-940 dated 30-06-2009 (annexure — E), which allegedly, includes the ineligible Foresters, so as to make it the basis for making appointment by way of promotio on the posts of Range Officers, Grade — II. One more grievance as projected in this writ petition is that the respondents are not following the mandate contained in Sub Rule (2) of Rule 2 of the J&K Civil Services (Reference of Vacancies and Holding of Meetings of Departmental Promotion Committee) Rules, 2005 (for short Rules of 2005), in as much as, neither the available vacancies are being referred to the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) nor are the meetings convened in terms of the said Rules of 2005. 3. On notice issued, respondents have filed the objections/reply affidavit, paragraphs 6 to 9 whereof may be noticed: "6. In reply to para-6, it is submitted that the promotion of the Foresters to the post of Range Officer Grade-II is being made in terms of SRO 335 of 1991 as per the seniority and eligibility and availability of post. Since the petitioners are very junior and their seniors appointed in the Department since last three decades are still working as Foresters, as such, cannot be considered for promotion at this stage. 7. Since the petitioners are very junior and their seniors appointed in the Department since last three decades are still working as Foresters, as such, cannot be considered for promotion at this stage. 7. In reply to para-7, it is submitted that the petitioners are not eligible so far it relates to their seniority position as their seniors are still working as Foresters and the petitioners along with their seniors have been placed as Incharge Range Officers against the post of direct recruitment quota of Range Officer Grade-I on stop gap arrangement till these posts are filled up by the Public Service Commission when petitioners have right of consideration for promotion against promotion quota alone. 8. In reply to para-8, it is submitted that the Forest Deportment has only 65 posts of Range Officers Grate-II sanctioned in the department by Government, out of which 19 are in position and 46 vacancies are available for promotion and are required to be filled up as per reservation rules as well. The petitioners being junior, as such, not eligible for promotion as Range Officers-II respectively. 9. In reply to para-9, it is submitted that the recommendations of the Committee chaired by the Conservator of Forests, Central Circle have been accepted by the Competent Authority and accordingly the Foresters seniority list was issued vide Forest order No. 17 of 2010 dated 27-01-2010 and endorsement NO.PCCF/Estt/NG/Fr/Seniority/62-150 dated 27-01-2010 where under the seniority position of the petitioners is as under: S.No. Position assigned in due Petitioners/Foresters Seniority list 1. 94 Ali Mohammad Itoo 2. 103 Mohammad Qasim Ward 3. 104 Mohamad Ashraf 4. 210 Mushtaq Ahmad Sherwani 5. 217 Ishtiaq Ahmad Matoo 6. 222 Javid Ahmad Nathkhan. The above position of seniority assigned to the petitioners does not entitle them the right of consideration for promotion to the post of Range Officer Grade-II in exclusion of all these who are senior to them as the act of this sort would supersede the eligible and senior Foresters who are at higher position in seniority list." 3. Mr. The above position of seniority assigned to the petitioners does not entitle them the right of consideration for promotion to the post of Range Officer Grade-II in exclusion of all these who are senior to them as the act of this sort would supersede the eligible and senior Foresters who are at higher position in seniority list." 3. Mr. Jan, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondents are under statutory obligation to follow the mandate contained in Rules of 1991 and Rules of 2005 in stricto senso so as to ensure, firstly, that the ineligible candidates are not considered for being appointed by way of promotion to the higher post of Range Officer, Grade — II and, secondly that the vacancies are referred to the DPC to be convened in terms of the Rules of 2005. He submitted further that the respondents have not dealt with this core issue in their reply affidavit. 4. Ms. Nusrat Razak, learned GA, submitted that the petitioners have been placed as Incharge Range Officers, Grade — II. She also submitted that in view of the stand taken by them in their reply affidavit, the petitioners rank juniors to many Foresters and their claim for appointment by way of promotion will be considered at their own turn. 5. The State formulates and notifies Statutory Rules to comply with the mandate contained in Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India. One, such requirement being meting out fair and similar treatment to the similarly circumstanced persons. Rules of 1991 have fixed the criteria for appointing the Foresters by way of promotion to the posts of Range Officers, Grade — II by providing that the Foresters must be having KFC and five years service for that category. The respondents are under statutory obligation to follow the mandate of the rules aforementioned in making appointments by way of promotion on the posts of Range Officers, Grade — II. Although the Foresters would constitute a class in themselves, yet while considering their claim for being promoted on next higher posts, the respondents have to adhere to the statutory rules and from amongst the class of Foresters, only those Foresters are to be considered, who are eligible in terms of the Rules of 1991. Although the Foresters would constitute a class in themselves, yet while considering their claim for being promoted on next higher posts, the respondents have to adhere to the statutory rules and from amongst the class of Foresters, only those Foresters are to be considered, who are eligible in terms of the Rules of 1991. The rules, itself, have carved out class of eligible candidates from amongst the Foresters so that they cannot be grouped with the ineligible candidates, for, that will be doing violation to the constitutional guarantees contained in articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India, in as much as, the ineligible and eligible candidates cannot be grouped together and considered for being given uniform treatment. The respondents are further duty bound to follow the mandate contained in the Rules of 2005. The available vacancies are to be referred to the DPC which is to be convened twice a year. It appears that the rules have been notified to avoid stagnation of the employees also to ensure that the public interest does not suffer because of non-manning of the available public posts. The respondents are, thus, under obligation to accomplish the purpose enshrined in the Rules of 2005. 6. In the backdrop of what is stated above, this petition is disposed of in the following manner: "By issuance of writ of Mandamus, respondents are directed to comply with the mandate contained in Sub Rule (2) of Rule 2 of the J&K Civil Services (Reference of Vacancies and Holding of Meetings of Departmental Promotion Committee) Rules, 2005. They are further directed that in consequence of the aforementioned direction, the eligible Foresters be considered in accordance with the mandate contained in the Rules of 1991 for being appointed by way of promotion to the posts of Range Officers, Grade-II. The respondents will also consider claim of the petitioners for regularization of their services on the posts of Range Officers, Grade-II from the date they are officiating on the said posts in accordance with the rules." 7. Disposed of along with CMPs.