JUDGMENT R. Banumathi, CJ. This writ petition has been filed (i) for quashing the portion of sub-rule (2) of Rule 12 of the Jharkhand Jansewak (Recruitment and Condition of Service) Rules (Amendment), 2012 as arbitrary, discriminatory, ultra vires and violative of the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and (ii) for direction to the respondents to prepare a common gradation list of the Village Level Workers (VLWs) working in the Department as per the seniority reckoning from the date of joining on the aforesaid post and only thereafter to grant promotion to the VLWs. 2. Brief facts:- In the erstwhile Bihar, for recruitment of Jan Sevak/Village Level Worker, V.L.W (Recruitment & Condition of Service) Rules, 1958 was introduced. As per Rule 9(iii), (iv) and (v), the selected candidates would undergo such training for such period at a basic agriculture school as may be prescribed from time to time and certain number of successful candidates may be required to undergo further training for six months. The circular dated 10.11.1984 was issued by the Joint Secretary, Department of Rural Rehabilitation & Panchayati Raj, Government of Bihar, regarding appointment of VLWs and the members of the petitioner Association were appointed in pursuance of the aforesaid letter dated 10.11.1984 and joined the post in the year 1985 as VLWs in the Rural Development Department and were controlled by the provisions contained in the letter no.10622 dated 10.11.1984. In 1987, the erstwhile State of Bihar enacted Jan Sewak And Village Extension Workers (Recruitment & Condition of Service) Rules, 1987 providing therein the mode and manner for appointment of Jan Sewaks. In 1987, the erstwhile State of Bihar enacted Jan Sewak And Village Extension Workers (Recruitment & Condition of Service) Rules, 1987 providing therein the mode and manner for appointment of Jan Sewaks. In the aforesaid Rules, three separate criteria were provided for appointment of Jan Sewak – (a) candidates selected till 31.3.1990 having educational qualification of Matric were required to undergo one year successful training and after training those candidates were appointed on the post of Jan Sewaks and those candidates were to undergo one year further training during their service tenure; (b) candidates selected after 31.3.1990 having educational qualification Matric were required to undergo full training of 2 years and thereafter they were appointed on the post of Jan Sewaks; and (c) candidates having educational qualification of Graduation in Agriculture or higher degree were only required to undergo three months training and thereafter they were required to appear in a limited written examination and if those candidates failed in the written examination, they were required to undergo normal training, i.e. for one year or 2 year as the case may be. 3. The Agriculture & Sugarcane Department, Government of Jharkhand, introduced VLWs (Recruitment & Service Condition) Rules, 2011, in which the minimum qualification for appointment of VLWs prescribed is Intermediate in Science with three subjects out of four subjects, namely, Physics, Chemistry, Biology and Mathematics and training period has also been reduced to six months. Rule 12 had been introduced creating avenue for promotion. As per Rule 12.1, the promotion of VLWs would be made according to seniority as per the State list prepared by the Director, Agriculture. In terms of Rule 17 of the VLWs (R & S Condition) Rules, 2011, has repealed 1987 Rules, but all the actions and orders issued under the repealed Rules shall not be affected. 4. The Agriculture & Sugarcane Department, Government of Jharkhand, amended the aforesaid VLWs (R & S Condition) Rules, 2011 through Jansewak (Recruitment & Condition of Service) Rules (Amendment), 2012, whereby sub-rule (2) of Rule 12 has been introduced. In Rule 12(2), it was provided that only VLWs (fully trained) would get promotion to the post of Block Agriculture Officer. As per Rule 12(2), 50% of the post of Block Agriculture Officer (BAO) shall be filled up by direct recruitment. In Rule 12(2), it was provided that only VLWs (fully trained) would get promotion to the post of Block Agriculture Officer. As per Rule 12(2), 50% of the post of Block Agriculture Officer (BAO) shall be filled up by direct recruitment. Remaining 50% of the post of BAO shall be filled up by promoting Jan Sewaks, i.e. 25% from Agricultural Graduates with full training and another 25% from Non-Agricultural Graduates with full training. Case of the Petitioner:- The petitioner is a representative body of VLWs, who are posted in different blocks in the State of Jharkhand and they have been appointed in pursuance of and are controlled by the provisions contained in letter no.10622 dated 10.11.1984. The petitioner-Association challenges sub-rule (2) of Rule 12 as arbitrary, illegal, discriminatory and violative of the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. According to the petitioner, with the implementation of the Jan Sewak (R & S Condition) (Amendment) Rules, 2012, the members of the Association, who have joined the service in 1985 and whose appointment were made as per the then existing VLWs (R & S Condition) Rules, 1958, will be deprived from being considered for their promotion to the post of Block Agriculture Officer. As per the provisions contained in the Jan Sewak (R & S Condition)(Amendment) Rules, 2012, only fully trained VLWs are to be considered for promotion to the post of Block Agriculture Officer and the same is arbitrary. The members of the petitioner Association cannot be denied their promotion to the post of Block Agriculture Officer on the ground that the members of the petitioner Association have not undergone full training. In spite of the fact that the petitioner-Association has been making representation to give training to the members of the petitioner-Association, the concerned authorities of the State Government had failed to provide them full training. The members of the petitioner-Association are working as VLWs for 27 years and are entitled to be considered for promotion. Rule 12.2 of the Jan Sewak (R & S Condition)(Amendment) Rules, 2012, provides for promotion only to those with “full training”. In spite of repeated representations, the members of the petitioner-Association were not given training and therefore, the members of the petitioner-Association cannot be deprived of their promotional opportunities. Rule 12.2 of the Jan Sewak (R & S Condition)(Amendment) Rules, 2012, provides for promotion only to those with “full training”. In spite of repeated representations, the members of the petitioner-Association were not given training and therefore, the members of the petitioner-Association cannot be deprived of their promotional opportunities. Rule 12.2.1 of the Jan Sewak (R & S Condition)(Amendment) Rules, 2012, prescribing full training of VLWs for being considered for promotion is arbitrary. The respondents are bound to prepare a common gradation list of VLWs working in the Department before granting promotion to the post of Block Agriculture Officer so that the members of the petitioner Association may not face hostile discrimination. Hence, the writ petition. 5. Averments in Counter-Affidavit : Refuting the contention made in the writ petition, the State has filed counter contending that the promotional provision was included as para 12.2 in the Jansewak(R & S Conditions)(Amendment) Rules, 2012, for those Jan Sewaks with full training who are working under Agriculture & Sugarcane Development Department, Jharkhand, vide notification no.3249 dated 5.11.2012. The members of the petitioner Association were appointed by the Rural Rehabilitation and Panchayat Raj Department, Government of Bihar, vide letter no.10622 dated 10.11.1984 and the members of the petitioner Association have been working under the Rural Development Department and not under the Agriculture Department. The members of the petitioner Association are controlled and guided by the provisions contained in letter no.10622 dated 10.11.1984. The Agriculture Department has nothing to do with the claim of the petitioner because they are not working under the Agriculture Department, Jharkhand and they have been working only under Rural Development Department. Seniority of their cadre in the gradation of VLWs/Jansewaks working under the Agriculture Department are to be decided only as per the conditions laid down in letter no.10622 dated 10.11.1984, by which they were appointed and therefore, the petitioner-Association can neither challenge the Jansewak (R & S Condition) (Amendment) Rules, 2012, nor seek for a direction to prepare a common gradation list of VLWs. Contentions 6. Learned Senior Counsel, Md.S.Anwar, appearing for the petitioner, contended that the impugned Jansewak (R & S Condition) (Amendment) Rules, 2012, is arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Contentions 6. Learned Senior Counsel, Md.S.Anwar, appearing for the petitioner, contended that the impugned Jansewak (R & S Condition) (Amendment) Rules, 2012, is arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Laying stress upon the VLWs (R & C Service) Rules, 1958, learned Senior Counsel contended that appointment of VLWs has to be done after training in Agriculture School or Basic Agriculture School but in view of the suspension of such training by the Agriculture Department for the last ten years, the members of the petitioner-Association could not undergo training. Learned Senior Counsel further submitted that the members of the petitioner-Association were appointed in the year 1985 as per the letter no.10622 dated 10.11.1984 and they are fulfilling the eligibility criteria and they have been working for the last 27 years but in spite of repeated representation, the members of the petitioner-Association were not given training. Learned Senior Counsel further submitted that after coming into effect, the VLWs/Village Extension Workers (R & S Condition) Rules, 1987, the petitioner-Association made several representations to the concerned authorities for providing the required training of one year to the members who were selected till 31.3.1990 and in spite of such representations, the members of the petitioner-Association have not been provided with the required training. Placing reliance on the judgment rendered in the case of Raghunath Prasad Singh Vs. Secretary, Home(Police) Department, Government of Bihar & Ors. reported in 1988 Supple. SCC 519, learned Senior Counsel submitted that reasonable promotional avenues/opportunities should be available in every wing of public service. It was submitted that making the employees to suffer adversely for the default or lapse on the part of the Government itself, would be unjust, unreasonable and arbitrary. The members of the petitioner-Association cannot be deprived of their fundamental right to be considered for promotion. 7. Learned Addl. Advocate General(AAG), Mr.Jai Prakash, submitted that as per Rule 12.2 of the Jansewak (R & S Condition) (Amendment) Rules, 2012, for being promoted to the post of Block Agriculture Officer, VLWs must have degree of graduation, which may be of Agriculture or any other subject. 7. Learned Addl. Advocate General(AAG), Mr.Jai Prakash, submitted that as per Rule 12.2 of the Jansewak (R & S Condition) (Amendment) Rules, 2012, for being promoted to the post of Block Agriculture Officer, VLWs must have degree of graduation, which may be of Agriculture or any other subject. Learned AAG submitted that so far as qualification of the members of the petitioner-Association is concerned, the required qualification for appointment as VLW under the VLWs (R & C Service) Rules, 1958, is only Secondary School Examination and when the members of the petitioner-Association are only having the qualification upto the Secondary School level, they cannot challenge the vires of the Jansewak (R & S Condition)(Amendment) Rules, 2012, as discriminatory. Learned AAG further submitted that the members of the petitioner-Association have no right to be considered for promotion, nor seek for a direction to prepare a common gradation list since the members of the petitioner-Association were appointed in pursuance of letter no.10622 dated 10.11.1984 (Annexue -2). Annexure -2 was issued by the Department of Rural Rehabilitation & Panchayati Raj, and not by the Department of Agriculture and Sugarcane. The learned AAG submitted that Annexure – 2 (letter dated 10.11.1984) would show that the expenses of these additional posts were made under different heads of the Department of Rural Development and those appointments on the additional posts were treated to be a different cadre. The main budgetary head of those additional posts of VLWs is separate, i.e 314 Samudayik Vikas Gramin Nirman (now 2501), whereas the main budgetary head of the Jan Sewaks under Agriculture Department was 305 (now 2401). Learned AAG further submitted that in para 8 of Annexure – 2, letter dated 10.11.1984, it was stated that on proper training those posts will merge in the main cadre of VLWs and when the members of the petitioner-Association have not undergone the requisite training as stated in para 8 of the Annexure – 8 , the petitioner-Association cannot seek for a direction to prepare a common gradation list of VLWs as per the seniority reckoning from the date of joining on the said post. 8. We have considered the submissions of the writ petitioner and the respondents and the materials on record. 8. We have considered the submissions of the writ petitioner and the respondents and the materials on record. The following points emerge for consideration in this writ petition:- (i) Whether sub-rule (2) of Rule 12 of the Jansewak (R & S Condition)(Amendment) Rules, 2012, is arbitrary, discriminatory, ultra vires and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. (ii) Whether the members of the petitioner-Association are entitled to be considered for promotion and can seek for a direction to prepare a common gradation list of VLWs. (iii) Whether the impugned Jansewak (R & S Condition) (Amendment) Rules, 2012, relates to VLWs working under Agriculture and Sugarcane Department. 9. Initially before 2012, there was no clearcut provision for promotion of Jan Sewaks in general, except for those who possessed degree of B.Sc, Agriculture. Several representations were received by the Agriculture & Sugarcane Department, Jharkhand, for considering the promotional matters of Jan Sewak/VLWs working under the Agriculture Department. Due to non-availability of rules/regulation regarding promotion of Jan Sewak/VLWs, it could not be possible to consider the case of promotion of Jan Sewaks working under the Agriculture & Sugarcane Department and the Department framed rules to provide promotion to Jan Sewaks, either Agriculture Graduates or Non-Agriculture Graduate, working under the Agriculture & Sugarcane Development Department, Jharkhand and the same was issued in notification no.3249 dated 5.11.2012. As per para 12.2, 50% of the total vacancy of Block Agriculture Officer shall be fulfilled by direct recruitment and the remaining 50% vacancy from the basic grade post of Jan Sewak on the basis of promotion as indicated in the rules. Rule 12.2 reads as under:- “12.2 Promotion of Jan Sewak shall be done as per the following tabulated chart:- 12.2.1 Sl. Name of Basic Grade/promoted post Pay Scale Procedure for appointment/promotion Classification of post/ category 1. X X X X 2. Block Agriculture Officer Rs. 9300-34800/-Grade Pay Rs. 4200/- a) 50% of total vacancy by direct recruitment b) 50% of total vacancy from the Basic grade post of Jansevak on the basis of promotion Class -III (i) 50% of total promotional post shall be filled up under Jansevak Recruitment Rules, 1958, 1987 and 2011 by the Non-agriculture graduates Jansevaks having requisite qualification and full training. (ii) 50% of total promotional post shall be filled up under Jansevak Recruitment Rules, 1958, 1987 and 2011, by the Agriculture Graduate Jansevaks having requisite qualification and full training. (ii) 50% of total promotional post shall be filled up under Jansevak Recruitment Rules, 1958, 1987 and 2011, by the Agriculture Graduate Jansevaks having requisite qualification and full training. 10. The Jansewak (R & S Condition)(Amendment) Rules, 2012, is intended to create promotional avenues to those Jan Sewaks working under the Agriculture & Sugarcane Development Department. The members of the petitioner-Association were appointed by the Rural Rehabilitation & Panchayat Raj Department, Government of Bihar, as seen from Annexure – 2, letter no, 10622 dated 10.11.1984. On recommendation of the Union of India, four additional post of VLWs were created in each block and the members of the petitioner Association were appointed against the said created additional posts. Ever since their appointment, the members of the petitioner-Association have been working under the Rural Development Department and they are not working under the Agriculture Department, Jharkhand. Para 8 of the said letter no.10622 dated 10.11.1984 provides for provision of additional training programme to be organized by the Basic Agriculture School and Agriculture Extension Training Centre. After completion of the said training, the additional posts against which the petitioner and associate members were appointed were to be merged into the general Jan Sewak cadre. Until and unless the training programme is completed, the cadre of the said additional posts (four posts in each block) against which the members of the petitioner-Association are working will remain separate at district level. 11. The averments made in the counter-affidavit filed by the State of Jharkhand (Agriculture Department) are refuted by the petitioner-Association in the rejoinder by them on 17.9.2013. In the rejoinder, it is stated that the members of the petitioner-Association are working only under Agriculture Department since the parent Department is the Agriculture Department. The petitioner has referred to para 8 of the counter-affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent, Under Secretary, Rural Development Department, Jharkhand, on 11.1.2013, to contend that the controlling and parent department of the Village Level Workers is the respondent no.2, Secretary, Agriculture & Sugarcane Development Department. 12. In the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent no.3, it is not specifically stated that the parent Department of the members of the petitioner-Association is also Agriculture & Sugarcane Department. 12. In the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent no.3, it is not specifically stated that the parent Department of the members of the petitioner-Association is also Agriculture & Sugarcane Department. On the other hand, in para 10 of the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent no.3 on 11.1.2013, it is clearly stated that in terms of letter no.10622 dated 10.11.1984 of Rural Rehabilitation & Panchayati Raj Department, Bihar, Patna, Rural Development Department provided one month training to the VLWs of Ranchi, Khunti, Gumla appointed under IRDP (Integrated Rural Development Programme) and the said training was given at SIRD (State Institute of Rural Development), Hehal, Ranchi. The training given to the members of the petitioner-Association by the Rural Development Department clearly indicates that the petitioners had been working under only Rural Development Department and the members of the petitioner-Association have not completed the training as provided in para 8 of the letter no.10622 dated 10.11.1984 through which the members of the petitioner-Association were appointed. In terms of para 8 of the aforesaid letter, only on completion of full training, the members of the petitioner-Association can be merged in the common cadre of VLWs working under the Agriculture Department. 13. In the supplementary counter-affidavit filed by the respondent, Secretary, Rural Development Department, on 27.9.2013, it is stated that the members of the petitioner-Association were given initial training for one month. It is further stated that the members of the petitioner-Association, after getting training in the Agricultural Training Centre, they will be absorbed in Jan Sewak (R & S Conditions) Rules, 1958 and until then, they would be kept as a separate cadre. It is further pointed out that the Rural Development Department, vide its letter no.7285 dated 11.10.2010, has requested the Agriculture & Sugarcane Development Department to absorb these VLWs (members of petitioner-Association) in general Jan Sewak cadre, which is the subject-matter of Agriculture & Sugarcane Development Department. When the Rural Development Department has requested the Agriculture & Sugarcane Development Department to impart agricultural training to the members of the petitioner-Association and to absorb these VLWs in general Jan Sewak cadre, the petitioners are to work out remedy before the 3rd and 4th respondents for completion of their required training for being absorbed in general Jan Sewak cadre as contemplated in letter no.7285 dated 11.10.2010. 14. 14. The case of the petitioner is that inspite of repeated representations, they have not been given training and the Association, vide its letter dated 24.8.2009, raised the issue regarding providing full training to the members of the petitioner-Association whose appointment were made in 1987 and inspite of such representation, they were not imparted training and it is not the fault of the member of the petitioner-Association. Further contention of the petitioner is that their appointment had been made in pursuance of three different rules, namely, VLWs (R & C Service) Rules, 1958, 1987 and 2011 respectively and under all three aforesaid rules, training periods are different and when the appointment of the members of petitioner-Association had been made in pursuance of the VLWs (R & C Service) Rules, 1958, they could not be provided full training due to failure of the concerned authorities of the State Government and therefore, petitioners contend that they cannot be faulted in having not completed the full training and the members of the petitioner-Association cannot be deprived of their promotional opportunities. 15. Further case of the petitioner is that the separate list of three cadres of VLWs have been prepared and kept by the Department:- (i) untrained/one month training obtained, (ii) one year training obtained and (iii) two years trained Diploma holder VLWs. The petitioner-Association mainly places reliance upon the letter sent by the Director, Agriculture, Government of Jharkhand through letter dated 21.7.2004 by which report was called for from the Deputy Commissioners and all the District Agriculture Officers relating to promotion of VLWs to the post of Block Agriculture Officer. 16. As discussed earlier, the petitioners are working only under the Rural Development Department. Letter no.10622 dated 10.11.1984 provides provisions for separate training programme (para 5 of the letter) to be organized by a separate organization namely Bihar Gramin Vikas Sansthan, Ranchi, for the Jan Sewaks, like the members of the petitioner-Association and their associates. Para 8 of the said letter no.10622 dated 10.11.1984 provides for additional training programme to be organized by the Basic Agriculture School and Agriculture Training Extension Centre and only after completion of the said training, the post was to be merged in the general Jan Sewak cadre according to the Jansewak (R & S Condition)(Amendment) Rules, 2012. Para 8 of the said letter no.10622 dated 10.11.1984 provides for additional training programme to be organized by the Basic Agriculture School and Agriculture Training Extension Centre and only after completion of the said training, the post was to be merged in the general Jan Sewak cadre according to the Jansewak (R & S Condition)(Amendment) Rules, 2012. For want of complete and full training as stipulated in the letter no.10622 dated 10.11.1984 they could not be absorbed in general cadre of Jan Sewak and they remain as a different cadre working under the Rural Development Department. The main budgetary head for payment of salary of the said additional post was separate. The main budgetary head of the said cadre was 314 Samudayik Vikas Gramin Nirman (now 2501), whereas the main budgetary head of the Jan Sewaks under Agriculture Department was 305 (now 2401). The service conditions of the members of the petitioner-Association are governed by the service conditions as provisioned in letter no.10622 dated 10.11.1984, by which they were appointed. Until the training as stipulated in the said letter is completed, the members of the petitioner-Association remain as a separate cadre. Only after completion of the training as per the provisions contained in the said letter, the members of the petitioner-Association can be absorbed. When the members of the petitioner-Association are working as VLWs in the Rural Development Department and not absorbed in the Agriculture & Sugarcane Development Department, they cannot seek for preparation of a common gradation list based on the date of joining of VLWs. Let us consider the contentions of the petitioner-Association regarding the challenge to sub-rule (2) of rule 12 of the Jansewak(R&S) Condition(Amendment) Rules 2012. 17. The main functions of the Block Agriculture Officer are to work for overall growth of agriculture in the block and (i) to make farmers acquainted with all Central and State Schemes regarding agriculture; (ii) to make farmers educated and upto date regarding the crops/products (iii) to make farmers educated as to suitability of the crops/products, soil quality and climatic conditions etc.; (iv) to give all inputs to the farmers regarding agricultural operatioans and (v) to make farmers educated and upto date with regard to loan and other facilities available to them. Besides the above agricultural works, Block Agriculture Officers are also to work under the Block Development Officer and to assist him in all Governmental functions like election, preparation of different cards like voter I.D, Aadhar card etc. and in all other administrative activities in the Block. 18. Having regard to the nature, technicalities and the responsibility of the work of Block Agriculture Officer, out of 50% of the promotional post, 25% promotion is given to Agriculture Graduates with full training and remaining 25% to Non-Agricultural Graduates with full training. Having regard to the responsibilities involved, the VLWs, who are considered for promotion, must have the full training. Therefore, it cannot be contended that giving 25% promotion to the Agriculture Graduates with full training and remaining 25% to Non-Agriculture Graduates with full training is arbitrary or discriminatory. It is only to create promotional avenues for the Jan Sewaks, for which graduation with full training has been prescribed for the Jan Sewaks to be promoted as Block Agriculture Officer. There is no merit in the contention of the petitioner-Association challenging the rules as being arbitrary and the contention is liable to be rejected. In para 7 of the supplementary counter-affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent on 27.9.2013, it is stated that only after getting the required training in Agricultural Training Centre, VLWs will be absorbed in general cadre of Jan Sewaks and until then they will be kept as a separate cadre at district level. The 3rd respondent had sent a letter no.7285 dated 11.10.2010 requesting the Agriculture and Sugarcane Development Department to absorb the VLWs in general Jan Sewak cadre, which is the subject-matter of Agriculture and Sugarcane Development Department. 19. The case of the petitioner-Association is that in spite of the representations, the members of the petitioner-Association have not been given training and by letter dated 8.10.2001 and also by letter dated 14.10.2009 and other letters, the petitioner-Association raised the issue regarding providing full training to the members of its Association whose appointment was made earlier in 1984 and inspite of such repeated representation, they were not provided full training and therefore, it is not the fault of the members of the petitioner-Association in not undergoing the training. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner-Association submitted that in spite of repeated representation, the members of the petitioner-Association were not given the training, the interest of VLWs cannot be affected by not bringing them in general cadre of Jan Sewaks and not giving them promotion. Learned Senior Counsel also submitted that earlier Special Secretary, Agriculture and Sugarcane Department has sent a letter bearing memo no.2239 dated 29.7.2004 requesting the Director, Agriculture, Jharkhand, Ranchi, to do needful on demand of VLWs to provide training to half-trained/untrained VLWs with stipend of Rs.500/-or recognize them as Agriculture Diploma holders as per their experience. It is pertinent to note that the said letter no.2239 dated 29.7.2004 is in respect of the VLWs working in Agriculture and Sugarcane Department and does not pertain to the members of the petitioner-Association, who have been working in Rural Development Department. Except making the representations, the petitioner-Association had not taken steps then and there to have full training as provisioned in letter no.10622 dated 10.11.1984 so as to qualify them to be absorbed in general cadre of Jan Sewaks. 20. The members of the petitioner-Association, only after full training, will be absorbed in general cadre of Jan Sewaks and while so, the petitioner-Association cannot seek for a direction to prepare a common gradation list. When the members of the petitioner-Association are yet to be absorbed in the general cadre of Jan Sewaks, it is not open to the petitioner-Association to challenge the sub-rule (2) of Rule 12 of the Jansewak (R & S Condition)(Amendment) Rules, 2012. As pointed out earlier, only after getting the required training in Agricultural Training Centre, the members of the petitioner-Association will be absorbed in the general cadre of Jan Sewaks; until then, they will be kept as separate cadre at the district level. By the letter no.7285 dated 11.10.2010, the Rural Development Department has requested the Agriculture & Sugarcane Development Department to absorb the members of the petitioner-Association and such other VLWs in general Jan Sewak cadre, which is the subject-matter of the Agriculture & Sugarcane Development Department, after providing necessary training. It is for the petitioner-Association to pursue the same with the concerned authorities. When the members of the petitioner-Association are working in the Rural Development Department, no direction could be issued to the respondents to prepare a common gradation list of Jan Sewaks. 21. It is for the petitioner-Association to pursue the same with the concerned authorities. When the members of the petitioner-Association are working in the Rural Development Department, no direction could be issued to the respondents to prepare a common gradation list of Jan Sewaks. 21. For the foregoing reasons, the petitioner-Association is not entitled to any relief and direction sought for and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed and accordingly the same is dismissed. Petition dismissed.