JUDGMENT : 1. These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners aggrieved against the communication dated 23/4/2021 (Annex.5) by Principal Chief Conservator of Forests requiring the marks obtained by the Foresters in the recruitment – 2016 for the purpose of completing the exercise of time bound promotion at the department level and provisional seniority list dated 1/11/2021 (Annex.6) for the post of Foresters. 2. It is inter alia indicated that in the Recruitment – 2016 held for the post of Foresters vide advertisement dated 16/10/2015, applications were invited Division-wise and in the note it was specifically indicated that the recruitment was on Division-wise basis and only for the purpose of convenience a combined advertisement has been issued. It is submitted that pursuant to the advertisement the recruitment was held with different question papers for different divisions, the results were declared separately along with separate cut off and merit list Division-wise. 3. After being appointed, the petitioners continued to serve as Foresters, when on 23/4/2021 a communication (Annex.5) was sent by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (HOFF) requiring the marks obtained by the Foresters in the Recruitment 2016 initiated by advertisement dated 16/10/2015. Whereafter, a provisional seniority list dated 1/11/2021 (Annex.6) was issued, wherein, qua those recruited pursuant to the Recruitment-2016, their seniority has been indicated based on the marks purportedly obtained in the said recruitment. 4. Submissions have been made that said action of the respondents is not justified as the recruitment was held Division-wise, there were separate papers and separate merit list issued and that the cut off in various divisions were so different that at one division the cut off was 100 and in another division the same was 40 and as such, all those who had participated in the recruitment Division-wise and were selected cannot be equated for the purpose of seniority and, therefore, the respondents be directed to prepare the seniority list in terms of the date of appointment. Reference has been made to provisions of Rule 42 of the Rajasthan Forest (Subordinate) Service Rules, 2015 (‘Rules, 2015’), wherein, it is indicated that the seniority shall be determined from the date of appointment on the post after regular selection. 5. Reference has been made to provisions of Rule 42 of the Rajasthan Forest (Subordinate) Service Rules, 2015 (‘Rules, 2015’), wherein, it is indicated that the seniority shall be determined from the date of appointment on the post after regular selection. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent State raised preliminary objections that the seniority list is provisional only and that qua the said list the petitioners could have filed objections, which some of the petitioners have filed, and till such time the final seniority list is issued, the petitioners do not have any cause of action. 6. Further submissions have been made with reference to proviso (i) to Rule 42 of the Rules, 2015 that the inter se seniority of persons appointed to a post in a particular category by direct recruitment on the basis of one and the same selection is to be determined by the order of merit in the list prepared under Rule 30(5) and as such, the plea raised by the petitioners in this regard has no basis. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the private respondents also raised similar issues by making submissions that the plea raised by the petitioners has no substance in view of the express provisions of Rule 23, 30 (5) and proviso (i) to Rule 42 of the Rules, 2015. 8. Submissions were also made that the plea raised by the petitioners requiring the seniority list to be prepared on the basis of date of appointment cannot be countenanced as the same essentially could be based on fortuitous circumstances and as the recruitment was held based on a common advertisement and common syllabus, merely because different papers were given in the examination which exams were held on the same date, the provisions of Rule 42 of the Rules, 2015 requiring preparation of inter se seniority based on merit cannot be given a go-bye and, thereby, the petitions besides being premature, on merits also deserve dismissal. 9. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. 10. 9. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. 10. It is no doubt true that the petitioners have sought to question the provisional seniority list (Annex.6) issued by the respondents, however, looking to the fact that the respondents have adopted a particular procedure for the purpose of preparation of provisional seniority list, the apprehension expressed by the petitioners in the petition regarding decision having been taken by the State in a particular manner cannot be said to be without any basis. 11. The recruitment which was held in pursuance to the advertisement dated 16/10/2015 inter alia made specific indications as under: ^^ou foHkkx jktLFkku esa jktLFkku v/khuLFk ou lsok fu;e 2015 ds varxZr ouiky dh lh/kh HkrhZ ds ou e.Myokj dqy 193 fjDr inksa dh HkrhZ ds fy, ;ksX; vH;fFkZ;ks ls vkWu ykbZu vkosf=n i= vkefa=r fd, tkrs gSA” ^^uksV%& 1--------------- 2- ;g in ou e.My v/khu HkrhZ dk gksus ds dkj.k vkj{k.k e.Myokj gh ns; gS] rnkuqlkj gh n'kkZ;k x;k gSA 3- ;g HkrhZ ou e.Myokj inksa gsrq gS] ijarq lqfo/kk ds fy, foKfIr bdtkbZ tkjh dh tk jgh gSA^^ 12. It is not denied that the examinations for the post were held Division-wise and separate examination papers were set for each Division. The cut off and merit list was issued Division-wise and orders of appointment were also issued Division-wise. The provisions relevant for the present purpose are : “30. Selection to the post other than Soil Conservation Assistant (Engineering/Agriculture).- (1) A written examination shall be held simultaneously throughout the State for direct recruitment to the post other than Soil Conservation Assistant (Engineering/Agriculture), except otherwise directed by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests. The written examination shall be of objective type carrying 100 marks in accordance with syllabus specified in Schedule-IV or general standards prescribed in Schedule II, as relevant to the post. The marks obtained in written examination shall be taken into consideration for final selection. The number of candidates, in each category viz. The written examination shall be of objective type carrying 100 marks in accordance with syllabus specified in Schedule-IV or general standards prescribed in Schedule II, as relevant to the post. The marks obtained in written examination shall be taken into consideration for final selection. The number of candidates, in each category viz. Schedule Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Backward Classes, Special Backward Classes and unreserved classes, called for Physical Fitness and Physical Efficiency test/trade test wherever applicable, shall be restricted to five times of number of vacancies in the relevant category Provided that - (i) where physical fitness and physical efficient test/trade test is not required under these rules, number of candidates called for medical test shall be restricted to one and half times the number of vacancies in the relevant category. (ii) candidates scoring marks equal to the last candidate shortlisted for physical fitness and physical efficiency tests/trade test, wherever applicable, in that particular category, shall be called for physical fitness and physical efficiency test/trade test, wherever applicable. (iii) candidates scoring marks higher than or equal to the last candidate of unreserved category shortlisted for physical fitness and physical efficiency tests/trade test, wherever applicable, shall be shortlisted for such test, wherever applicable, irrespective of his category. (2) …………. (3) …………. (4) …………. (5) the Committee shall prepare a list of the candidates arranged in order of merit as disclosed by their aggregate marks finally awarded to each candidate. If two or more of such candidates obtain equal marks in the aggregate the Committee shall arrange them in order of merit on the basis of their general suitability for service. The Committee shall recommend to the Appointing Authority a list of candidates equal to the number of vacancies in order of merit for appointment to the post(s) concerned: Provided that- (i) the Committee shall not recommend any candidate who has failed to obtain aggregate of 40% marks in written, personality and viva-voce examination. (ii) ………….. (iii) …………. (iv) …………..” “42. Seniority.-Seniority of persons appointed to the post encadred in the service or lowest categories of posts in each group/section of the service, as the case may be, shall be determined from the date of appointment on the post after regular selection in accordance with the provisions of these rules. (ii) ………….. (iii) …………. (iv) …………..” “42. Seniority.-Seniority of persons appointed to the post encadred in the service or lowest categories of posts in each group/section of the service, as the case may be, shall be determined from the date of appointment on the post after regular selection in accordance with the provisions of these rules. Appointment on adhoc or urgent temporary basis shall not be deemed to be appointment after regular selection: Provided that - (i) the inter se seniority of person appointed to a post in a particular category by direct recruitment on the basis of one and the same selection, except those who do not join service when a post is offered to them within period of six weeks from the date of issue of order unless the period is extended by the Appointing Authority, shall be determined by the order of merit in the list prepared by the Commission under sub-rule (2) of rule 29 or by committee under sub-rule (5) of rule 30 and sub-rule (2) of rule 31. (ii) ………….. (iii) ………….. (iv) ………….. (v) ……………. (vi) ……………..” 13. As to whether the action of the respondents at the relevant time was in consonance with the Rules or not, after holding the recruitment pursuant to the advertisement it is a fact that the preparation of list of candidates arranged in the order of merit as required by Rule 30(5) was only prepared Division-wise and the same was not prepared State-wise, as a specific query put to learned counsel for the State has not been answered. 14. Besides the above, the said aspect is also fortified from the communication dated 23/4/2021 (Annex.5) issued by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests to all the Forest Officers requiring them to provide the marks obtained by all the Foresters. 15. 14. Besides the above, the said aspect is also fortified from the communication dated 23/4/2021 (Annex.5) issued by the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests to all the Forest Officers requiring them to provide the marks obtained by all the Foresters. 15. The implication of the provisions of Rule 42 of the Rules, 2015, which essentially provides that seniority shall be determined from the date of appointment on the post after regular selection and by its proviso it is provided that the inter se seniority in a particular category by direct recruitment on the basis of one and the same selection shall be determined by order of merit in the list prepared under Rule 30(5) of the Rules, 2015 has apparently not been examined by the authorities in the context of nature of selection which was made pursuant to the advertisement dated 16/10/2015 i.e. Division-wise. 16. As already noticed hereinbefore, the respondents have issued the provisional seniority list by assimilating the marks obtained by all those recruited Division-wise pursuant to the advertisement dated 16/10/2015 and has issued the provisional seniority list based on the said created merit list in terms of the proviso. 17. Objections qua the provisional seniority list have also been filed by few of the petitioners as indicated by the petitioners as well as by the State, which are yet to be decided by the respondents. 18. In those circumstances and the fact that there is an apparent anomaly in the recruitment pursuant to the advertisement dated 16/10/2015 and the procedure sought to be adopted by the respondents in preparation of the seniority list, it would be appropriate that the petitioners file comprehensive objections to the provisional seniority list by raising all the issues as raised in the present petitions and as noticed by this Court hereinbefore, based on which, besides the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, the Secretary, Department of Forest, shall take a comprehensive view on the aspect taking into consideration the observations made hereinbefore in relation to the procedure to be adopted by the respondents for determination of seniority in relation to Recruitment-2016 and they shall pass detailed speaking order in this regard. 19. Consequently, the petitions filed by the petitioners are disposed of. 19. Consequently, the petitions filed by the petitioners are disposed of. The petitioners may file comprehensive objections to the provisional seniority list by raising all the issues as raised in the present petitions and till such time the objections, as directed hereinbefore, are decided and a comprehensive view is taken by the State, the respondents shall not finalize the provisional seniority list and only after the decision as directed is taken, the final seniority list shall be published by the respondents based on the decision to be taken by them. 20. Needful may be done with utmost expedition by the petitioners & the respondents.