ORDER : VIKRAM NATH, J. 1. Present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioners for the purpose of seeking following reliefs:- "(A) Be pleased to admit/allow this Petition; (B) Be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or directions and be pleased to declare Rule 3(b) of the Vaidya Panchkarma/Deputy Hospital Superintendent, Class-I of Indian System of Medicine and Homeopathy, Recruitment Rules, 2017 published through Notification dated 2nd November, 2017 by the Health and Family Welfare Department, Sachivalaya, Gandhinagar, State of Gujarat as ultra-vires to Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution as the same prescribes the qualification of Post Graduate Degree in Ayurved for filling-up the post of Vaidya Panchkarma, Class I through direct selection and the same Rule 3(b) may kindly also quashed and set aside as the same is running contrary to Rule 2(a)(i) of the Vaidhya Panchkarma/Deputy Hospital Superintendent, Class I of India System of Medicine and Homeopathy, Recruitment Rules, 2017 published through Notification dated 2nd November, 2017 and the Notification Dated 07/11/2016 and Schedule-4 published by Government of India under Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970 and therefore, the same may kindly be quash and set aside; (B) Be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or directions and be pleased to direct the respondents-authorities to consider the representations made by the petitioners as expeditiously as possible and such representation may be decided after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners; (C) Be pleased to quash and set aside the Advertisement Dated 22/09/2019 being Advertisement no. 24/2019-2020 published by Government Public Service Commission for filling up for the post of the Vaidya Panchkarma/Deputy Hospital Superintendent, Class I as the same being contrary to Rule 2(a)(i) of the Vaidya Panchkarma/Deputy Hospital Superintendent, Class I of India System of Medicine and Homeopathy, Recruitment Rules, 2017 and the Notification dated 07/11/2016 and Schedule-4 published by Government of India under Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970; (D) Pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, be pleased to grant interim relief and by way of interim order, to restrain the respondents-authorities from undertaking recruitment process for filling-up the post of Vaidya Panchkarma, Class-I through Advertisement Dated 22/09/2019 being Advertisement no. 24/2019-2020 published by Government Public Service Commission. (E) … ........." 2. 24/2019-2020 published by Government Public Service Commission. (E) … ........." 2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner No. 1 Association represents its members who are serving as Medical Officer Class-II in Government Ayurved Hospitals, Government Dispensaries and Government Ayurved Colleges/Hospitals. By way of this petition, grievance is raised by the petitioners with regard to issuance of grant of higher pay scale, issue of seeking payment of non-practicing allowance and the Association has filed various proceedings with regard to even Pay Band for its members. All the members of the petitioner Association are serving as Medical Officer Class-II (Ayurved), i.e. Bachelor in Ayurved and Medical Surgery (BAMS), and are serving on regular sanctioned posts of Medical Officer Class-II. The petitioners state that under the authority of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2, there are as many as 542 Medical Officers Class-II, who are serving on the basis of their qualifications of Degree in Ayurvedas. According to the petitioners, Medical Officer (Ayurved)/Resident Medical Officer (Ayurved) Class-II Recruitment Rules, 2015, came to be published by notification dated 1.7.2015 by the Health and Family Welfare Department, Sachivalaya, Gandhinagar. Rule 3 of the Rules 2015 said that the post is to be filled in through direct selection only and as per Rule 3(b)(i), degree in Bachelor of Ayurved Medicine and Surgery (BAMS) obtained from the University established or incorporated by or under the Central or the State Act is to be considered valid and required qualification. Pursuant to the requisite qualification, the members of the petitioner No. 1 Association are serving on their respective posts as Class-II in various hospitals. 3. The petitioners say that from the post of Medical Officer Class-II, promotions are being given to the post of (01) Vaidya Panchkarma/Deputy Hospital Superintendent Class-I and (02) District Ayurved Officer Class-I. Both these aforesaid promotional posts are Class-I, to be filled in from Department of Ayurved and Medical Officer. It has been the case of the petitioners that the petitioners who are serving as Class-II Medical Officer, as stated above, have a very limited advancement of opportunities for promotion considering total number of sanctioned posts of Vaidya Panchkarma/Deputy Hospital Superintendent Class-I and District Ayurved Officer Class-I, which is hardly less then 10% of the sanctioned posts of petitioners' cadre which can get promotion. It is further asserted by the petitioners that existence of promotional avenues for the post of District Ayurved Officer, which according to the petitioners, remained merely on paper and actual post has not been filled up through promotions from the cadres of the members of the petitioner Association since last 20 years. According to the petitioners, the aforesaid higher level post of District Ayurved Officer Class-I lastly came to be filled in through direct selection way back in 2008 and as per the Recruitment Rules, for the post of District Ayurved Officer Class-I, minimum qualification prescribed under the Rules is Bachelor Degree in Ayurveda and that too for direct selection as well as promotion on the administrative post of District Ayurved Officer. The next higher level post of members of the petitioner Association is the post of Vaidya Panchkarma Class-I/Deputy Hospital Superintendent Class-I. According to the petitioners, the post of Vaidya Panchkarma Class-I is higher level post than the post of Medical Officer (Ayurved) Class-II, to which the members are belonging, and both the aforesaid posts are higher level, considered as equivalent posts so far as the pay scale attached to the aforesaid posts is concerned. More than 11 years have elapsed, promotions have never been given to the post of District Ayurved Officer from the candidates serving on the post of Medical Officer Class-II (Ayurved). Thus, virtually, the District Ayurved Officer which is higher level post, is available to the petitioners' cadre for promotional avenues but then same have not been benefited to the members of the petitioner Association since 20 years by now. Even till 2017, as per the Recruitment Rules, which has remained in force for the post of Vaidya Panchkarma Class-I, the same provides for filling up the post through promotion amongst the incumbents who are serving on the cadre on which the petitioners have been serving since long and as such, since the members of the petitioner Association are already having such qualification of Bachelor in Ayurved through direct selection procedure, they must have an opportunity to seek appointment on higher level post of Vaidya Panchkarma Class-I even as per the Rules framed for that purpose. The petitioners even on the basis of the relevant Recruitment Rules, which remained in force till 2008, an advertisement came to be published by the respondent No. 3 for filling up the post of Vaidya Panchkarma Class-I, in which qualificatory criteria, which has been prescribed, is that of Bachelor in Ayurved Degree. Even Medical Officer (Ayurved) Class-II who have their basic qualification of Bachelor Degree in Ayurvedas used to be considered as eligible to participate in the recruitment procedure for filling up the post of Vaidya Panchkarma/Deputy Hospital Superintendent Class-I. But, still, by virtue of the effect of the Rules, though members of the petitioner Association are eligible for even promotion to the post of Vaidya Panchkarma Class-I, they are deprived of, which has led the petitioners to approach this Court by way of the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4. Learned advocate Mr. N.K. Majmudar appearing on behalf of the petitioner Association has submitted that there is a hostile discrimination to discard the petitioners from being given a chance for the post of Vaidya Panchkarma Class-I. The Rule prescribed by way of Notification dated 2.11.2017 is irrational, arbitrary and discriminatory. The effect of Rule 3(b) of the Rules deprives the Medical Officer Class-II to have member's right to participate in the recruitment process for the post of Vaidya Panchkarma/Deputy Hospital Superintendent Class-I, even though they are holding their basic qualification of Bachelor Degree in Ayurved and as such, this Rule 3(b) is creating an unreasonable classification between two sets of similarly situated persons. Rule 2(a)(i) makes a Medical Officer Class-II as eligible for promotion to the post of Vaidya Panchkarma Class-I on the basis of his or her qualification of Bachelor Degree in Ayurveda. But though, these Medical Officers Class-II are serving with adequate/requisite qualifications, they are treated as ineligible from seeking appointment through direct selection. Resultant effect is that this Rule 3(b) is nothing but ultra-vires to the constitutional mandate guaranteed under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. In fact, reading of Rule 3(b) and 2(a) (i) of the said Rules is running contrary to the statutory Rules published by the notification dated 23.5.1990 for the post of District Ayurved Officer Class-I. Therefore, when that be so, Rule 3(b) of the said Rules is required to be declared as violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. 5. 5. Learned advocate Mr. Majmudar has further submitted that not only this Rule 3(b) is running counter to the spirit of the promotional avenues which are made available but is giving discriminatory treatment in respect of two class of persons, holding similar qualifications and by referring to the said Rules, a request is made that the relief prayed for deserves to be granted. No other submissions have been made. 6. Having heard learned advocate Mr. Majmudar for the petitioners and having gone through the relevant Rules, first of all, Rules dated 1.7.2015, which are known as Medical Officer (Ayurved)/Resident Medical Officer (Ayurved) Class-II Recruitment Rules, has prescribed the eligibility criteria for appointment to the post which is prescribed in Rule 3, which reads as under:- 3. To be eligible for appointment by direct selection to the post mentioned in Rule 2, a candidate shall, (a) not be more than 30 years of age. (b) possess- (i) a decree in Bachelor of Ayurved Medicine and Surgery (B.A.M.S.) obtained from any of the Universities established or incorporated by or under the Central or State Act in India; or any other educational institution recognized as such or declared to be deemed as University under section 3 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956; or possess an equivalent qualification recognised under Indian Medicine Central Council Act, 1970. (ii) the basis knowledge of computer application as prescribed in the Gujarat Civil Services Classification and Recruitment (General) Rules, 1967. (iii) adequate knowledge of Gujarati or Hindi or both. (c) have passed the Secondary School Certificate (S.S.C.) Examination or Higher Secondary Certificate (H.S.C.) Examination with Sanskrit as one of the subjects or its equivalent from recognized Institute. 7. A further perusal to the Rules relating to District Ayurved Officer under Directorate of Ayurved Recruitment Rules, 1990 has prescribed the eligibility criteria under Rules 2 and 3 respectively and the ratio for filling up by direct recruitment as well as through promotion shall be of 1:1. Now, as against this, a perusal to the Rules relating to Vaidya Panchkarma/Deputy Hospital Superintendent Class-I of Indian System of Medicine and Homeopathy Recruitment Rules, 2017, has prescribed qualification and required experience in Rule 2. Rule 3 is related to the eligibility criteria for direct selection. These Rules 2 and 3 are referred to on page 71 onwards, which are reproduced hereinafter:- 2. Rule 3 is related to the eligibility criteria for direct selection. These Rules 2 and 3 are referred to on page 71 onwards, which are reproduced hereinafter:- 2. Appointment to the post of Vaidya Panchkarma/Deputy Hospital Superintendent Class I, in the Gujarat Ayurveda Services under the Directorate of Indian System of Medicine and Homeopathy shall be made either: (a) by promotion of a person of proved merit and efficiency from amongst the persons, who,- (i) have worked for not less than eight years in the cadre of Resident Medical Officer (Ayurveda), Class-II or Medical Officer (Ayurveda), Class II in the Gujarat Ayurveda Services under the Directorate of Indian System of Medicine and (ii) have passed the qualifying examination for computer knowledge in accordance with the provisions of the Gujarat Civil Services Computer Competency Training and Examination Rules, 2006; Provided that where the appointing authority is satisfied that a person having the experience specified in sub-clause (i) above is not available for promotion and that it is necessary in the public interest to fill up the post by promotion even of a person having the experience for a lesser period, it may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, promote such person who possesses experience of a period of not less than two-third of the period specified in sub-clause (i) above; or (b) by direct selection. 3. To be eligible for appointment by direct selection to the post mentioned in rule-2, a candidate shall, (a) Not be more than 40 years of age; (b) possess a degree in Ayurved from recognised Institution or university specified by law in India; (c) possess ten years experience of running a dispensary on Ayurvedic system or combined seven years experience of running dispensary on Ayurvedic system and running hospital on Ayurvedic system and (d) possess adequate knowledge of Gujarati, Hindi and Sanskrit. Provided that the qualification regarding experience may be relaxed at the discretion of the Gujarat Public Service Commission in Cadre of a candidate belonging to the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe if at any stage of selection, the Gujarat Public Service Commission is of the opinion that sufficient number of candidates from these communities possessing, the requisite experience are not likely to be available to fill up the vacancies reserved for them: Provided further that, the upon age limit may be released in favour of a candidate who is already in the service of the Government of Gujarat in accordance with the provisions of the Gujarat Civil Services, qualification and recruitment (General) Rules, 1967, as amended from Time to time. Provided also that the upper age limit may be required in favour of a candidate possessing exceptionally good qualification as experience or both; Provided also that the preference may be given to a candidate possessing post graduates decree or diploma in Ayurved." 8. From the conjoint reading, it appears that the case which is put up by the petitioners to be treated on equal pedestrian, is apparently illogical in view of the aforesaid eligibility criteria prescribed in the Rules. There appears to be no hostile discrimination of any nature, on the contrary each higher level post has prescribed relevant criteria specifically and therefore simply because the members of the petitioner Association holding the qualification of Bachelor in Ayurved is no circumstance which may permit the petitioners to be considered for the higher level post, i.e. Vaidya Panchkarma Class-I. A bare perusal of Rule 3(b) has specifically provided that to be eligible for the post, i.e. Vaidya Panchkarma/Deputy Hospital Superintendent Class-I, it has clearly prescribed that to be eligible for appointment by direct selection, one must have a post-graduate degree in Ayurved obtained from any of the Ayurveda Universities and must have 5 years' experience on the post not below the rank of Resident Medical Officer (Ayurved) Class-II or allied requirements which are mentioned therein. This apparent reading, in the considered opinion of this Court, is neither discriminatory nor irrational or illogical which may attract violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution in any form and as such, each post has prescribed specific qualificatory criteria and is not possible to be confused at the instance of the petitioners. We see no merit in the challenge made by the present petitioners. We see no merit in the challenge made by the present petitioners. The contentions which have been raised have no merit. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed with no order as to costs.