JUDGMENT 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. There were four writ-petitioners before the learned Single Judge who have succeeded vide impugned judgment dated 27.09.2008. 3. The four writ-petitioners were appointed on different dates on adhoc basis as LDCs' under Dholpur Judgeship as per Rajasthan Subordinate Civil Courts Ministerial Establishment Rules, 1986. They made a request on different dates to be transferred and posted in departments in the State of Rajasthan. The said request was accepted by the competent authority of the State of Rajasthan. While relieving the four writ-petitioners the District Judge clearly informed that the four persons would lose lien on the posts held by them. The State department to which they were transferred clearly recorded in their record that the posts to which the four writ petitioners were transferred were vacant posts and for purposes of seniority they would rank lowest in the seniority for the post of LDC in the respective department. 4. Challenge by the writ-petitioners was to orders repatriate them. 5. The learned Single Judge has noted sub-rule (1) of Rule 7 of the Rajasthan Subordinate Officers Ministerial Staff Rules, 1957 which permits filling up of a posts in the cadre by transfer from one department to another with the concurrence of the head of the department. The learned Single Judge has also noted Rule 27 as per which persons making request to be transferred would rank junior most. The learned Single Judge has highlighted that the writ petitioners were ranked junior most in the departments to which they were transferred. 6. The only argument for consideration in the appeal would be that Rule 7 of the Rule 1957 permit transfer of the person holding the post in departments at the Government with the concurrence of the head of the Department. Meaning thereby, the Rule permits appointment by transfer of employees of different departments of the Government and that the writ-petitioners were not the employees of the department of the Government. They were employees under Dholpur Judgeship and were governed by the Rajasthan Subordinate Civil Courts Ministerial Establishment Rules, 1986. 7. Meaning thereby, the Rule permits appointment by transfer of employees of different departments of the Government and that the writ-petitioners were not the employees of the department of the Government. They were employees under Dholpur Judgeship and were governed by the Rajasthan Subordinate Civil Courts Ministerial Establishment Rules, 1986. 7. There may be a merit in the argument but at the same time it cannot be overlooked that when the writ petition sought transfer and consent for transfer was accorded by the heads of the two departments i.e. the transferree as well as transferor department it was clearly indicate that they were lose lien in the transferee department. They were also clearly indicated that in the department to which they are transferred they would rank junior most. We additionally note that the first writ petitioner i.e. respondent No.1 has superannuated from service while working under the appellant and the others are likely to superannuate in the next 3 to 5 years. 8. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.