JUDGMENT : VASANTI A NAIK, J. 1. By this writ petition, the State of Maharashtra challenges the common order of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, dated 11.04.2014 allowing the original applications filed by the respondents and directing the petitioners to consider the respondents for promotion under the provisions of Rule 3(a)(i) and (ii) of the Junior Engineer (Civil) GroupB NonGazetted in the Public Works Department and the Irrigation Department (Recruitment) Rules, 1998. 2. The feeder cadre for the promotion to the post of Junior Engineer is the post of Civil Engineering Assistant. As per the Civil Engineering Assistant GroupC in the Public Works Department Recruitment Rules, 1998, a Civil Engineering Assistant GroupC could be appointed by two modes, one being the mode of absorption and the other being the mode of nomination. As per Rule 5 of the Rules, a candidate who is appointed to the post of Civil Engineering Assistant GroupC is required to pass the departmental examination unless he has already passed the examination or is exempted from passing the said examination. All the respondents were appointed as Civil Engineering Assistants under the Civil Engineering Assistants GroupC Recruitment Rules, 1998. A seniority list of Civil Engineering Assistants was prepared on 30.08.2012 and the names of the Civil Engineering Assistants that were eligible for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer were placed in the seniority list. The appointment or promotion to the post of Junior Engineer could be made under the Junior Engineer Civil GroupB Non Gazetted in the Public Works Department and the Irrigation Department Recruitment Rules, 1998. In this petition, we are concerned with Rule 3 of the said rules. Under the said rules, the appointment to the post of Junior Engineer could be made by nomination and promotion. 25% of the posts of Junior Engineer are required to be filled by the selection process conducted by the Maharashtra Public Service Commission. 75% of the posts are required to be filled through the Staff Selection Board. 75% of the 75% posts of junior Engineer that are required to be filled by the Staff Selection Board are to be filled by nomination and 25% posts that are required to be filled by the Staff Selection Board are to be filled by promotion. 75% of the posts are required to be filled through the Staff Selection Board. 75% of the 75% posts of junior Engineer that are required to be filled by the Staff Selection Board are to be filled by nomination and 25% posts that are required to be filled by the Staff Selection Board are to be filled by promotion. Out of the 25% posts that are required to be filled by the Staff Selection Board, 20% are required to be filled by adhering to Rule 3(a)(i) of the rules pertaining to the recruitment of Junior Engineers. In terms of Rule 3(a)(i), the Civil Engineering Assistants who have passed the qualifying examination for the post of Junior Engineer conducted by the Engineering Staff College and who have the experience of not less than three years of regular service as a Civil Engineering Assistant, are required to be considered for promotion. 5% of the 25% posts that are liable to be filled by promotion are required to be filled, in accordance with the provisions of Rule 3(a)(ii) of the Rules. The said rule provides that the Civil Engineering Assistants, who possess a parttime or distance learning diploma would be entitled to be promoted on the basis of their seniority. Admittedly, none of the respondents had passed the qualifying examination for the post of Junior Engineer conducted by the Engineering Staff College and none of them possessed a parttime or distance learning diploma when they filed the original application before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal. It was the case of the respondents before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal that since they possess a regular three years diploma in Civil Engineering, they were not required to pass the qualifying examination for the post of Junior Engineer conducted by the Engineering Staff College and they were also not required to possess a parttime or distance learning diploma as they possessed a three years diploma in Civil Engineering. The Tribunal found favour with the submission made on behalf of the respondents and allowed the original applications filed by them. The common order of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal is challenged by the State of Maharashtra and others, in the instant petition. 3. The Tribunal found favour with the submission made on behalf of the respondents and allowed the original applications filed by them. The common order of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal is challenged by the State of Maharashtra and others, in the instant petition. 3. Shri Kilor, the learned Special Counsel for the petitioners, took this Court through the relevant recruitment rules of the year 1998 pertaining to the promotion of Junior Engineers to submit that a Civil Engineering Assistant desirous of seeking promotion to the post of Junior Engineer is required to either pass the qualifying examination for the post of Junior Engineer conducted by the Engineering Staff College as per Rules 3(a)(i), or he is required to possess a parttime or distance learning diploma as per Rule 3(a)(ii) of the Rules of 1998. It is submitted that the respondents had neither passed the qualifying examination for the post of Junior Engineer, conducted by the Engineering Staff College nor did they possess a parttime or distance learning diploma. It is submitted that the respondents have not challenged Rule 3 of the Rules of 1998 and in the absence of any challenge to the rules, the respondents cannot be heard to say that they would be entitled to promotion though they have not passed the qualifying examination for the post of Junior Engineer and they did not possess the parttime or distance learning diploma, as they possessed a three years diploma in Civil Engineering. It is submitted that merely because Rule 2 of the Rules of 1998 provides that parttime or distance learning diploma in Civil Engineering, recognized by the Government should be equivalent to three years diploma in Civil Engineering, the respondents cannot claim that they would be entitled to promotion in view of Rule 3(a)(ii) though they do not possess a parttime or distance learning diploma. It is submitted that the Tribunal did not consider Rule 3 of the Rules in the right perspective before holding that the respondents were entitled to promotion to the post of Junior Engineer. 4. Shri Shukla, the learned counsel for the respondent nos.1 to 5 and Shri Bade, the learned counsel for the respondent nos.2, 8 and 9, supported the order of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal. It is submitted that the respondents possessed a three years diploma in Civil Engineering. 4. Shri Shukla, the learned counsel for the respondent nos.1 to 5 and Shri Bade, the learned counsel for the respondent nos.2, 8 and 9, supported the order of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal. It is submitted that the respondents possessed a three years diploma in Civil Engineering. It is stated that parttime or distance learning diploma recognized by the Government is held to be equivalent to the three years diploma in Civil Engineering and since the respondents possess the three years diploma in Civil Engineering, they were not required to possess the parttime or distance learning diploma for seeking their promotion by resorting to Rule 3(a)(ii) of the Rules of 1998. It is submitted that for appointment of a Junior Engineer by nomination, a three years diploma in Civil Engineering would be the requisite qualification and since the respondents possess the three years diploma in Civil Engineering, they would not be required to pass the qualifying examination for the post of Junior Engineer, conducted by the Engineering Staff College. The learned counsel sought for the dismissal of the writ petition. 5. Shri Puranik, the learned counsel for the intervenors, submitted that the intervenors are unnecessarily made to suffer by the order of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal as the intervenors have an experience of more than three years of service as Civil Engineering Assistants and they have also passed the qualifying examination for the post of Junior Engineer, conducted by the Engineering Staff College. It is submitted that without joining the Civil Engineering Assistants like the intervenors, who could have been affected by the order of the Tribunal, the original application was filed by the respondents. The learned counsel adopted the arguments made on behalf of the petitioners. 6. To consider the correctness or otherwise of the order of the Tribunal, it would be necessary to consider the provisions of Rules 2 and 3 of the Junior Engineer (Civil) GroupB nongazetted in the Public Works Department and the Irrigation Department (Recruitment) Rules, 1998. Rules 2 and 3 of the Rules of 1998, read thus: “ 2. Definitions.In these rules, unless the context otherwise requires, (a) “Government” means the Government of Maharashtra, (b) “Parttime or Distance Learning Diploma” means a parttime or Distance Learning Diploma in Civil Engineering, recognized by Government, which is equivalent to three years Diploma in Civil Engineering. 3. Rules 2 and 3 of the Rules of 1998, read thus: “ 2. Definitions.In these rules, unless the context otherwise requires, (a) “Government” means the Government of Maharashtra, (b) “Parttime or Distance Learning Diploma” means a parttime or Distance Learning Diploma in Civil Engineering, recognized by Government, which is equivalent to three years Diploma in Civil Engineering. 3. In rule 3 of the principal rules, for clause (a), the following clause shall be substituted, namely: (a) by promotion of a suitable person on the basis of seniority subject to fitness from amongst the persons. (i) holding the post of Civil Engineering Assistant who have passed the qualifying examination for the post of Junior Engineer conducted by the Engineering Staff College, having not less than three years regular service in that post; or (ii) holding the post of Civil Engineering Assistant who possess a parttime or Distance Learning Diploma; or” It is apparent from Rule 3 of the Rules that promotion to the post of Junior Engineer is made from two categories of Civil Engineering Assistants. The first category of Civil Engineering Assistants that are entitled to promotion would be the Civil Engineering Assistants who have not rendered less than three years of regular service on the said post and who have passed the qualifying examination for the post of Junior Engineer, conducted by the Engineering Staff College. The second category of Civil Engineering Assistants that are entitled to be promoted to the post of Junior Engineer are required to possess a parttime or distance learning diploma. It is apparent from a reading of Rule 3 of the Rules that either those Civil Engineering Assistants, who have passed the qualifying examination and who have not rendered less than three years regular service on the said post and the Civil Engineering Assistants who possess a parttime or distance learning diploma would only be entitled to be promoted to the post of Junior Engineer. It is not disputed that none of the respondents had passed the qualifying examination for the post of Junior Engineer, conducted by the Engineering Staff College and none of them possess a parttime or distance learning diploma. According to the respondents, they were entitled to promotion irrespective of the provisions of Rule 3 because they possessed a three years diploma in Civil Engineering which is a requisite qualification for nomination to the post of Junior Engineer. According to the respondents, they were entitled to promotion irrespective of the provisions of Rule 3 because they possessed a three years diploma in Civil Engineering which is a requisite qualification for nomination to the post of Junior Engineer. According to the respondents, they were not entitled to possess a parttime or distance learning diploma as they possessed a three years diploma in Civil Engineering. The respondents had not challenged Rule 3 of the Rules of 1998. In the absence of any challenge to the Rules, the respondents cannot claim that they would be entitled to promotion as they possess the three years diploma in Civil Engineering which is a qualification for appointment to the post of Junior Engineer by nomination. On a reading of Rule 3, it is clear that if the respondents had not possessed a parttime or distance learning diploma which is equivalent to a three years diploma in Civil Engineering or had not passed the qualifying examination for the post of Junior Engineer, they were not entitled to be promoted to the post of Junior Engineer. The Tribunal relied on the definition of 'parttime or distance learning diploma' to erroneously hold that a Civil Engineering Assistant possessing a three years diploma would be entitled to be promoted under Rule 3(a)(ii) of the Rules. The definition clause, i.e. Rule 2(b) only specifies as to what type of parttime or distance learning diploma is required to be possessed by a Civil Engineering Assistant for seeking promotion under Rule 3(a)(ii) of the Rules. Any parttime or distance learning diploma which is not equivalent to a three years diploma in Civil Engineering would not help a Civil Engineering Assistant in seeking his promotion to the post of Junior Engineer under Rule 3(a)(ii) in view of Rule 2(b). It appears that by the insertion of Rule 3(a)(ii), the Government decided to give the benefit of promotion to those Civil Engineering Assistants who possessed a parttime or distance learning diploma which is equivalent to a three years diploma in Civil Engineering. A parttime or distance learning diploma which is not equivalent to, or was lesser than a three years diploma in Civil Engineering could not have been considered for promotion of the Civil Engineering Assistants to the post of Junior Engineer under Rule 3(a)(ii) of the Rules. A parttime or distance learning diploma which is not equivalent to, or was lesser than a three years diploma in Civil Engineering could not have been considered for promotion of the Civil Engineering Assistants to the post of Junior Engineer under Rule 3(a)(ii) of the Rules. It is apparent from a reading of the Rules of 1998 that only those Civil Engineering Assistants, who had passed the qualifying examination for the post of Junior Engineer, conducted by the Engineering Staff College and who had put in not less than three years of regular service on the post of Civil Engineering Assistant and the Civil Engineering Assistants who possessed a parttime or distance learning diploma which is equivalent to a three years diploma in Civil Engineering were entitled to be promoted to the post of Junior Engineer under the Rules. What was required by SubRule (a)(ii) of Rule 3 was not a three years diploma in Civil Engineering but a parttime or distance learning diploma. Even a parttime or distance learning diploma which was not in consonance with Clause 2(b) of the Rules could not have made a Civil Engineering Assistant eligible for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer. The Tribunal did not consider the Rules in the right perspective while holding that the respondents were entitled to be promoted to the post of Junior Engineer as they possessed the three years diploma in Civil Engineering. The respondents would have been entitled to take a chance to be nominated to the post of Junior Engineers on the basis of the three years diploma in Civil Engineering along with the other qualifications that are required to be possessed for appointment to the post of Junior Engineer by nomination. However, they could not have sought their promotion to the post of Junior Engineer under Rule 3 of the Rules as they did not fall in either of the two categories of Civil Engineering Assistants that are entitled to be promoted to the post of Junior Engineer. Merely because the respondents had passed the departmental examination that is required to be passed by a Civil Engineering Assistant as per Rule 5 of the Civil Engineering Assistants Group C in the Public Works Department Recruitment Rules, 1998, it cannot be said that they had passed the qualifying examination for the post of Junior Engineer. Merely because the respondents had passed the departmental examination that is required to be passed by a Civil Engineering Assistant as per Rule 5 of the Civil Engineering Assistants Group C in the Public Works Department Recruitment Rules, 1998, it cannot be said that they had passed the qualifying examination for the post of Junior Engineer. The departmental examination that is required to be passed under Rule 5 of the Civil Engineering Assistants Group C in Public Works Department Recruitment Rules is distinct from the qualifying examination that is required to be passed under Rule 3(a)(i) of the Junior Engineer Recruitment Rules, 1998. The order of the Tribunal is clearly illegal and is liable to be set aside. Hence, for the reasons aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order of the Tribunal is hereby set aside. The original applications filed by the respondents stand dismissed. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs.