JUDGMENT 1. These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners seeking a direction to the respondents to provide 12.5% horizontal reservation to the Ministerial Employees/in-service candidates/Government Employees in relation to the advertisement dated 06.09.2021 for the post of Village Development Officer. 2. The petitioners, who are working on the post of Lower Division Clerk under different Panchayat Samitis of different Zila Parishads have raised grievance that the respondents have issued advertisement dated 06.09.2021 (Annex.1) for recruitment on the post of Village Development Officer, whereby, as many as 3,222 post in Non-TSP and 674 post in TSP area have been advertised. However, in the advertisement, no provision has been indicated providing reservation to Ministerial Employees/in-service candidates/Government Employees and, therefore, the action of the respondents in this regard in not providing for the reservation is not justified. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners made submissions with reference to the recruitment to the post of Computer vide advertisement dated 03.09.2021 (Annex.3) in SBCWP No.808/2022 and that of Laboratory Assistant pursuant to advertisement dated 09.05.2018 (Annex.6) in SBCWP No.18103/2021 and for the post of Accountant and Junior Accountant pursuant to advertisement dated 06.09.2021 (Annex.7) that as in the said recruitments, reservation to the Ministerial Employees has been provided, the non-providing of the reservation by the respondents in the present recruitment is not justified. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners made submissions that provisions of Rule 262 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Rules, 1996 ('the Rules of 1996') provides for reservation of vacancies for other categories, wherein the reservation has been provided for physically handicapped candidates and as Sub Rule (2) of Rule 262 has made applicable other provisions regarding reservation of vacancies to the recruitment in the Panchayat Samiti and Zila Parishad Services and, therefore, the action of the respondents in not providing for the reservation to the extent of 12.5% in the present recruitment is not justified. 5. Reliance has been placed on judgment in Jitendra Kumar & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6947/2017, decided on 07.09.2017. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the State made submissions that the plea raised by the petitioners seeking reservation for the post of Village Development Officer is baseless. 5. Reliance has been placed on judgment in Jitendra Kumar & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6947/2017, decided on 07.09.2017. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the State made submissions that the plea raised by the petitioners seeking reservation for the post of Village Development Officer is baseless. Submissions have been made that under Rule 262 (2) of the Rules of 1996 though other provisions regarding reservation of vacancies have been made applicable but no general provision providing for reservation for Ministerial Employees has been cited so as to seek reservation in the present recruitment. 7. Submissions have been made that nowhere for recruitment on the post of Village Development Officer reservation for ministerial employees has been provided by the State either under the Rules and/or by any separate notification in this regard and as such, the plea raised by the petitioners in this regard has no basis. 8. Further submissions have been made that insofar as the recruitment to the post of Computer, Laboratory Assistant and Accountant are concerned, wherein, such reservation has been provided, the same is based on the applicable Rules, which specifically provide for such reservation. 9. Reference has been made to the provisions of Rajasthan Subordinate Service (Recruitment and Other Service Conditions) Amendment Rules, 2011 providing for reservation for Ministerial Employees for the post of Computer and Rajasthan Educational Subordinate Service Rules, 1971 which provides for reservation for the Ministerial Staff for the post of Laboratory Assistant. 10. Further submissions have been made that in terms of Rule 258 of the Rules of 1996, the post of Village Development Officer is part of Ministerial and Subordinate Post in the Panchayat Samiti and Zila Parishad service and on that account apparently in the Rajasthan Rural Development and Panchayati Raj State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1998 the post of Village Level Worker cum Secretary, Panchayat, which post has been renamed as Village Development Officer, has not been reflected and as such, the claim made providing for reservation in this regard is otherwise untenable. 11. 11. Further submissions have been made that there are no general provisions either under the Rajasthan Subordinate Service (Recruitment and Other Service Conditions) Rules, 2001 and/or any other provision providing for the reservation for ministerial candidates and in all the recruitments, wherever such reservation has been provided, same is based on specific provision in the Rules and, therefore, the plea raised by the petitioners in this regard deserves rejection and the petitions deserve to be dismissed. 12. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. 13. The petitioners have claimed the reservation as Ministerial Staff for the post of Village Development Officer in the recruitment pursuant to the advertisement dated 06.09.2021 (Annex.1). The basis for claiming the reservation as noticed hereinbefore is Rule 262 (2) of the Rules of 1996, which reads as under:- "Rule 262. Reservation of vacancies for other categories.- Notwithstanding anything contained in these rules, certain percentage of posts to be filled in by director recruitment shall be reserved for physically handicapped candidates as per rules of the State Government and shall be filled in accordance with the provisions of the Rajasthan Employment of the Person with Disabilities Rules 2000. (2) Other provisions regarding reservation of vacancies shall also be applicable as prevailing in the State Government from time to time." 14. A perusal for the above provisions would reveal that the Rule specifically provides for reservation for Physically Handicapped candidates as per Rule of the State Government and further provides for other provision regarding reservation of vacancies shall also be applicable as prevailing in the State Government from time to time. 15. The above provision is enabling in applying other provisions regarding reservation to the vacancies under the provisions of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act/Rules, 1996, however, 'other provisions' must exist for the purpose of applying the same to the recruitment under the Act/Rules. 16. 15. The above provision is enabling in applying other provisions regarding reservation to the vacancies under the provisions of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act/Rules, 1996, however, 'other provisions' must exist for the purpose of applying the same to the recruitment under the Act/Rules. 16. Despite repeated query made to counsel for the petitioners about any general provision/circular of the State providing for reservation for ministerial candidates like petitioners in all the recruitments, counsel for the petitioner has failed to point out any provision and has referred only to provisions of 262 (2) of the Rules of 1996 and, therefore, in absence of any specific provision/ Rule in this regard under the Rules of 1996, the plea raised by the petitioners seeking application of the reservation for the ministerial candidates cannot be countenanced. 17. So far as the reliance placed on the recruitment to the post of Computer, Laboratory Assistant and Accountant is concerned, the same, as specifically submitted by learned counsel for the respondent, are governed by the provisions of Rajasthan Subordinate Service (Recruitment and other Service Conditions) Amendment Rules, 2011, which provides that 12.5% of the post of computer, to be filled in by direct recruitment, shall be reserved and filled in from the ministerial staff of the Evaluation Organization, holding a post in the cadre substantively; for the post of Laboratory Assistant, the Rajasthan Education Subordinate Service Rules, 1971 provides that recruitment shall be 100% by direct recruitment out of which 12.5% of the post shall be reserved for being filled from the Laboratory boys/servant of School Education Department in accordance with proviso (5) to Rule 6 of the said Rules and similarly, in the Rajasthan Subordinate Accounts Service Rules, 1963, 12.5% reservation for the Ministerial Staff of the Departments of the Government has been provided. 18. In view of the above fact situation, wherein, in the instances cited by counsel for the petitioners, specific provisions have been indicated under various Rules and apparently, no general/specific provisions dealing with the grant of reservation to ministerial candidates are available, the plea sought to be raised by the petitioners seeking reservation for the post of Village Development Officer cannot be countenanced. 19. 19. So far as the judgment in the case of Jitendra Kumar (supra) is concerned, in the said case issue pertained to whether the petitioners therein, who were working on the post of Lower Division Clerk and Upper Division Clerk in the Panchayati Raj services could lay their claim against 12.5% reservation available for the ministerial staff of the Departments of the Government as envisaged under Rule 6 (iii) of the Rajasthan Subordinate Accounts Service Rules, 1963, which issue, is totally different and does not deal with aspect sought to be argued by counsel for the petitioners. 20. In view of the above discussion, it is apparent that for lack of any specific provision providing for reservation for ministerial employees as claimed by the petitioners, the advertisement issued by the respondents cannot be faulted. 21. There is no substance in the writ petitions, the same are, therefore, dismissed.