JUDGMENT : SANDEEP MEHTA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel Shri J.K. Kaushik representing the petitioners and Shri Pankaj Sharma, learned AAG representing the respondents. 2. Before proceeding further, it is relevant to mention here that after the writ petition was filed, the petitioner No. 2 Rakesh Kumar Verma passed away and his legal representative Smt. Pratima Verma has been taken on record. 3. Brief facts relevant and essential for disposal of this writ petition are noted herein-below: The petitioners Kishna Ram and Rakesh Kumar Verma were appointed as Junior Lab Assistants in the respondent Public Health and Engineering Department, Government of Rajasthan on 27.03.1993 and 06.11.1985 respectively. They were further promoted to the post of Senior Lab Assistant w.e.f. 14.06.2013 and 30.05.2003 respectively. As per the Rajasthan Services of Engineering Subordinate (Public Health Branch) Rules, 1967, the minimum educational qualification for the post of Jr. Lab Assistant is Intermediate in Science or equivalent academic qualification from a recognised institution preferably with experience of Laboratory work. 100% posts of Jr. Lab Assistants are meant to be filled in by direct recruitment. The posts of Sr. Lab Assistants are prescribed to be filled in ratio of 50:50 by direct recruitment and promotion respectively. The required educational qualification for direct recruitment is B.Sc., preferably with experience of water and sewerage analysis whereas the promotional posts are to be filled in from Jr. Lab Assistants having qualification of First Year Science or equivalent academic qualification from a recognised institution with 5 years experience as a Jr. Lab Assistant. Both the petitioners claim to be possessing the educational qualification of First Year Science or equivalent. As per the scheme of Rules, no further avenue of promotion was provided from the post of Sr. Lab Assistants appointed by direct recruitment and as a consequence, such employees were being superannuated from service without a single promotion. In this background, the respondents undertook an exercise in the year 1989 to create a channel of promotion for Sr. Lab Assistants and accordingly, 5 posts of Technical Assistants were created to be filled in the ratio of 50% by direct recruitment and 50% by promotion from the feeder post of Sr. Lab Assistant. However, the rules were never framed and the posts were filled in by ad-hoc arrangements. Subsequently, the post of Technical Lab Assistant was also downgraded to Sr. Lab Assistant. Lab Assistant. However, the rules were never framed and the posts were filled in by ad-hoc arrangements. Subsequently, the post of Technical Lab Assistant was also downgraded to Sr. Lab Assistant. Ultimately, the respondents made an endeavour to rectify the situation and a proposal was mooted for providing additional promotional opportunity to Sr. Lab Assistants working in the PHED and the cadre was proposed to be restructured. After the requisite exercise, a proposal was mooted to amend the Rajasthan Services of Engineers and Allied Posts (Public Health Branch) Rules, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 1968’) for appointment to the post of Jr. Chemist. Prior to the proposed amendment, 100% posts of Jr. Chemist were to be filled by direct recruitment with the qualification to hold at least a Second Class M.Sc. Degree in Chemistry from a University established by law in India or of a foreign University/Institution declared equivalent thereto by the Government. By the new proposal, it was broached that the posts of Jr. Chemist would be filled in ratio of 50% each by direct recruitment and by promotion from Sr. Lab Assistants having experience of 7 years. The amended rules were notified on 20.04.2015 and as per this amendment, the ratio of filling the post had been fixed at 50:50 by direct recruitment and promotion respectively. The feeder post for promotion is of Sr. Lab Assistant and the following qualification has been prescribed for the same: “B.Sc. With Chemistry from a University established by law in India of institution equivalent thereto declared by Government and five years experience on the post mentioned in column 5.” 4. The petitioners, who have been promoted to the post of Sr. Lab Assistants but do not possess the degree of B.Sc. or equivalent, approached this Court by filing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11635/2015 (Rakesh Kumar Verma and Others vs. State of Rajasthan and Others) for challenging the amended rules to the extent of the prescribed minimum qualification of B.Sc. for promotion to the post of Jr. Chemist claiming that since they possessed the requisite qualification for being appointed as Sr. Lab Assistants, the prescription of qualification of B.Sc. For the post of Junior Chemist, frustrated their right of promotion even though they had the requisite qualification for holding the feeder post. for promotion to the post of Jr. Chemist claiming that since they possessed the requisite qualification for being appointed as Sr. Lab Assistants, the prescription of qualification of B.Sc. For the post of Junior Chemist, frustrated their right of promotion even though they had the requisite qualification for holding the feeder post. It is stated at Para No. 10 of the present writ petition that the aforesaid S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11635/2015 was withdrawn vide order dated 14.10.2015 with liberty to the petitioners to agitate their cause on the administrative side. 5. The petitioners claim to have procured certain material documents under the Right to Information Act and thereafter, they have filed the instant writ petition setting out a case that initially, their proposal of minimum qualification of B.Sc. for providing promotional avenue from the post of Sr. Lab Assistants was not mooted. Later on, this restriction was imposed under the objection of the Finance Department. However, as per the petitioners, the Finance Department has no jurisdiction to intervene in this matter. In support of this contention, the minutes of the discussion held in the Finance Department, Government of Rajasthan have been annexed as Annexure-9. The petitioners further claim that a similar avenue of promotion is provided in the Excise Department by virtue of the Rajasthan Excise Laboratory (State and Subordinate Services) Rules, 2015 and therein, the qualification of the Chemical Assistant, which is provided in the feeder cadre, has also been recognised for promotion to the post of Junior Chemist. Thus, as per the petitioners, the Rajasthan Services of Engineers and Allied Posts (Public Health Branch) (Amendment) Rules, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 2015’), in addition to being grossly arbitrary, also create a hostile discrimination inter-se between the direct recruitees to the post of Sr. Lab Assistant and the promotees in the same cadre i.e. the petitioners herein who are being denied promotion just because they do not have the qualification of B.Sc. 6. Learned counsel Shri Kaushik urged that the Jr. Lab Assistants who are promoted as Sr. Lab Assistants after following the procedure provided in the rules, come at par with the Sr. Lab Assistants who are selected by direct recruitment because a common State wise seniority list is maintained for the entire cadre. Hence, a discrimination cannot be carved out while considering promotion from amongst the Sr. Lab Assistants who are promoted as Sr. Lab Assistants after following the procedure provided in the rules, come at par with the Sr. Lab Assistants who are selected by direct recruitment because a common State wise seniority list is maintained for the entire cadre. Hence, a discrimination cannot be carved out while considering promotion from amongst the Sr. Lab Assistants to the post of Jr. Chemist. He further urged that this distinction has been created on the recommendations of the Finance Department which has no locus in the matter. It was further submitted that in the analogous rules prevailing in the Excise Department, the qualification held by the persons on the lower post i.e. Sr. Lab Assistant has been recognised for promotion to the post of Jr. Chemist. He relied upon a Single Bench Judgment rendered in the case of Kum. Kalpana Moyal and Another vs. State of Rajasthan and Others, 2003 (2) WLC (Raj.) 179 and urged that the writ petition should be accepted and a direction be given to consider the case of the petitioners for promotion to the post of Jr. Chemist by striking down the requirement of Graduation in the promotional quota under the Rules of 2015. 7. Per contra, Shri Pankaj Sharma, learned AAG representing the respondents, vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the petitioners' counsel. He pointed out that the petitioner Rakesh Kumar Verma and similarly situated employees, challenged the Rules of 2015 by filing the writ petition No. 11635/2015 before the learned Single Bench and when the Court was not inclined to interfere in the matter, the writ petition was withdrawn. He urged that the qualifications and experience for the post of Jr. Chemist, have not been decided on the basis of the U.O. Note of the Finance Department and rather, the matter was discussed in the cabinet after taking views of the Department of Personnel, Finance Department, Law Department and the RPSC. The cabinet approved amendment was notified under the authority of Hon'ble the Governor. He further urged that no arbitrariness or discrimination is reflected in the Rules inasmuch as qualification of B.Sc. for the granting promotion from the post of Sr. Lab Assistant to Junior Chemist has been prescribed after objective consideration of the job requirement. The cabinet approved amendment was notified under the authority of Hon'ble the Governor. He further urged that no arbitrariness or discrimination is reflected in the Rules inasmuch as qualification of B.Sc. for the granting promotion from the post of Sr. Lab Assistant to Junior Chemist has been prescribed after objective consideration of the job requirement. The claim for parity on the basis of the Rules of the Excise Department is countered on the submission that the job requirements of Laboratory Assistants and the Jr. Chemists in the Excise Department, is very limited to the testing of excisable articles in the laboratories whereas, chemists working in the PHED are required to move around in the fields to collect water and sewerage samples and to give reports after analyzing the same. These duties directly deal with the health of the populace at large and hence, and hence the job requirements of a Chemist in Excise Department and a Chemist cannot be equated. On these grounds, Shri Sharma implored the Court to dismiss the writ petition. 8. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the submission advanced at bar and have gone through the rules and regulations as well as other documents filed on record by the petitioners' counsel. 9. Suffice it to say that two fundamental arguments were advanced by learned counsel Shri Kaushik for assailing the Rules. The first submission was that the original proposal to amend the Rules did not contemplate that for the 50% quota of promotion to the post of Junior Chemist, the Jr. Lab Assistants who got promoted as Sr. Lab Assistants, would be required to possess a degree in graduation for promotion as Technical Assistants but it is only on the interference and the U.O. Note issued by the Finance Department that such an arbitrary classification has been created. The second submission was that in the Excise Department, the qualification of graduation is not a sine-qua-non for promotion of a Senior Lab Assistant to the post of Jr. Chemist and as such, there is an apparent disparity in two set of rules for the same post which amounts to hostile discrimination. On the thrust of these arguments, Shri Kaushik implored the Court to strike down the Rajasthan Services of Engineers and Allied Posts (Public Health Branch) (Amendment) Rules, 2015 and to direct that the petitioners may be considered for promotion to the posts of Junior Chemists. On the thrust of these arguments, Shri Kaushik implored the Court to strike down the Rajasthan Services of Engineers and Allied Posts (Public Health Branch) (Amendment) Rules, 2015 and to direct that the petitioners may be considered for promotion to the posts of Junior Chemists. 10. We have considered the submissions advanced at bar and carefully perused the documents available on record. The reply filed by the respondents was scrutinized and upon a thorough analysis of the material placed on record, we find that the contention of the petitioners' counsel that the alleged disparity is the result of the interference by the Finance Department which has no locus in the matter, is totally unfounded. On going through the note-sheets placed on record, it becomes crystal clear that the file was received in the Finance Department for its comments and thereupon, the U.O. Note (Annexure-6) was marked by the department giving a suggestion of prescribing minimum qualification of B.Sc. for promotion from the post of Senior Lab Assistant to Junior Chemist. But the final approval to the proposal was given after discussion in the cabinet and with consultation of all the relevant departments. Thus, there is nothing on record to suggest that the questioned amendment in the Rules is the result of interference by the Finance Department. Hence, this argument of Shri Kaushik is not tenable. 11. So far as the contention of Shri Kaushik that there exists a disparity in the two sets of Rules (one of PHED and other of Excise Department) regarding educational qualification for the same promotional post, is concerned, we are least convinced by the said submission. The qualification for promotion to a particular post would definitely have to be considered in light of the job requirements on the post. On a perusal of the Rajasthan Services of Engineers and Allied Posts (Public Health Branch) (Amendment) Rules, 2015, it becomes clear that for direct recruitment to the post of Chemist, the minimum qualification prescribed is M.Sc. It is only in order to give an opportunity of avoiding stagnation in the cadre that the Laboratory Assistants were also recommended for consideration to be promoted to this post. While doing so, the respondents have approved that for the purpose of promotional post, the Senior Lab Assistant concerned must possess a minimum qualification of B.Sc. It is only in order to give an opportunity of avoiding stagnation in the cadre that the Laboratory Assistants were also recommended for consideration to be promoted to this post. While doing so, the respondents have approved that for the purpose of promotional post, the Senior Lab Assistant concerned must possess a minimum qualification of B.Sc. If at all, the contention of Shri Kaushik were to be accepted, then there would be a totally unreasonable disparity in the qualification provided for direct recruitment to the post of Junior Chemist which is a Masters degree whereas, the promotee could stake a claim only on the basis of having qualified First Year Science. Considering the sensitive nature of job to be carried out by a Jr. Chemist in the Public Health Engineering Department, the requirement of a higher educational qualification is definitely justified. There cannot be any dispute on the aspect that job description of a Chemist in the Excise Department and a Chemist in the Public Health Engineering Department, would be totally different because even as per the Rules, these posts in Excise Department are meant for the laboratory whereas, the Junior Chemists employed in the PHED would be required to work in the field to analyse the quality of drinking water being provided to the populace at large and to check sewerage water etc. which are functions directly dealing with public health and as such, there cannot be any compromise when qualifications of these persons are being considered. 12. As a consequence, we are of the firm opinion that the claim of parity staked by the petitioners' counsel on the basis of the Rules of Excise Laboratory is absolutely untenable. 13. On going through the learned Single Bench Judgment in the case of Kum. Kalpana Moyal (supra) cited by the petitioners' counsel, we find that the learned Single Judge, rather turned down the challenge of the petitioners to Rule 10 of the Rules of 1970 holding that they were not discriminatory, arbitrary or ultra-vires. However, the said Judgment is of no help to the petitioners. 14. Kalpana Moyal (supra) cited by the petitioners' counsel, we find that the learned Single Judge, rather turned down the challenge of the petitioners to Rule 10 of the Rules of 1970 holding that they were not discriminatory, arbitrary or ultra-vires. However, the said Judgment is of no help to the petitioners. 14. In wake of the discussion made hereinabove, this Court is of the firm view that amendment in the Rajasthan Services of Engineers and Allied Posts (Public Health Branch) (Amendment) Rules, 2015, which the petitioners have challenged by way of this writ petition, does not suffer from arbitrariness or hostile discrimination nor does the same infringe fundamental rights as enshrined under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India so as to declare the same to be ultra-vires. 15. As a consequence, the writ petition fails and is dismissed as being devoid of merit. 16. No order as to costs.