JUDGMENT 1. The instant writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners herein with the following prayers :- "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that your lordships may graciously be pleased to allow this writ petition and : I. that it is prayed that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, rule 20 of the Rajasthan Medical and Health Service Rules, 1963 be declared ultra vires to the provisions of articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India wherein it is not provided for grant of bonus marks for the acquired experience inter alia for the post of medical officer and consequently the respondents may specifically be commanded to add similar kind of proviso to the main provision for providing bonus marks as against the acquired experience for the post of medical officer as well. II. that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the action/inaction on the part of the respondent in not making the amendment under the rules of 1963 for grant of bonus marks at par with the other service rules be declared illegal, arbitary, malafide and violative of articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. III. That is also prayed that by an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents specifically the respondent university be commanded to make recommendation considering the acquired experience of the candidates for the post of medical officer under the advertisement dated 23.11.2019 making it subject to the final outcome of the present writ petition." 2. Mr. P.S. Balot, learned counsel representing the petitioner, vehemently and fervently urged that the petitioners are working as Medical Officers on purely ad hoc basis and are facing hostile discrimination in the matter of regular selection to the posts of Medical Officers under the Medical Officers Direct Recruitment Examination, 2019 claiming that the experience gained by the petitioners while working on ad hoc basis in the various health centers across the State of Rajasthan is not being considered for grant of bonus marks as is prevailing for recruitment in similar services, i.e. Ayurvedic, Yunani, Homeopathy and Naturopathy doctors, Pharmacists etc. Mr. K.S. Rajpurohit, learned AAG, on the other hand vehemently and fervently urged that the prayer made by the petitioners is totally misconceived. He submitted that the policy decision to grant bonus marks in any selection process is the exclusive domain of the rule making power of the State Government. Mr. K.S. Rajpurohit, learned AAG, on the other hand vehemently and fervently urged that the prayer made by the petitioners is totally misconceived. He submitted that the policy decision to grant bonus marks in any selection process is the exclusive domain of the rule making power of the State Government. A statute cannot be struck down/supplemented by this court in exercise of the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this court because this would amount to encroachment on the rule making power exclusively in the domain of the State legislature. He relied upon the judgment of Division Bench of this court in the case of Ratan Singh & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. [D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.13131/2018 decided on 05.08.2019] and implored the court to dismiss the writ petition. 3. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced at bar and have carefully perused the grounds set out in the writ petition, the prayer made therein and the reply of the respondents so also the documents available on record. 4. Suffice it to say that the prayer which has been made by the petitioners in this writ petition is absolutely vague and laconic. The petitioners have claimed that Rule 20 of the Rajasthan Medical and Health Service Rules, 1963 should be declared ultra vires to the extent it does not provide for grant of bonus marks for experience acquired by the persons, who have worked as Medical Officers on ad hoc/urgent temporary basis. However, the petitioners have not demonstrated as to what is the foundation of their claim for grant of bonus marks and under which statutory provision, the Ayurveda, Yunani, Homeopathy and Naturopathy doctors have been granted such indulgence. On a perusal of the recruitment notification Annex.4, it becomes clear that this benefit of bonus marks has been granted to the incumbents under the provisions of the Rajasthan Ayurvedic, Unani, Homoeopathy and Naturopathy Service Rules, 1973. The provision of bonus marks in one statute cannot make the corresponding rule of another statute ultra vires the Constitution of India merely because the latter does not provide for grant of bonus marks to the aspirants claiming selection under such statute. The provision of bonus marks in one statute cannot make the corresponding rule of another statute ultra vires the Constitution of India merely because the latter does not provide for grant of bonus marks to the aspirants claiming selection under such statute. This court considered this very controversy in the case of Ratan Singh (supra) and held :- "It is argued on behalf of the petitioners that the decision in Daulat Ram (supra) ought not to be construed as binding because in the present case, all employees working and discharging similar functions, employed by Sahakari Upbhokta Wholesale Bhandar and Drugs Distribution Centers were primarily and essentially working only for the State and carrying out its policies. This Court is of the opinion that the argument has no merit. In Daulat Ram - as indeed in Gaurav Kumar Sen, this Court highlighted that the grant of bonus marks is a benefit which cannot be claimed as a matter of right. If the State chooses to prioritize employees working in its establishment or directly in relation to a programme evolved by it and it chooses not to grant such benefit to others, this is neither discriminatory nor arbitrary. Therefore, the challenge to the amended rule cannot be accepted." 5. As a consequence of the above discussion, we find no merit in this writ petition, which is dismissed as such.