ORDER : 1. Above titled two writ petitions, in sum and substance, are with the following prayer which for the sake of convenience, is being taken from the leading case being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14484/2017: (i) To consider the case of the petitioner in light of the judgment rendered in Writ No. 6001/2006 and 1050/2004 decided on 10.09.1997 and 21.07.2006 respectively and sanction pay scale of PTI Gr. II w.e.f. the date his Junior were given on 22.12.1975 with all consequential benefits. (ii) That respondents may be directed to revise his pension w.e.f. 01.08.2001 (date on retirement on superannuation is 31.12.2000 with all consequential benefits). 2. Succinctly stated, the relevant facts as pleaded by the petitioner are as follows: 2.1 The petitioner was appointed on the post of Junior Instructor Gr. II vide order dated 24.12.1964 and he joined the service on 22.01.1965. The petitioner was further appointed on the post of NDS-Junior Instructor Gr. I on 01.03.1971. The Central government closed the operation of national Discipline Scheme and NDS was transferred to the Government of Rajasthan. By virtue of transfer of national Discipline Scheme to the State Government, all employees working under said scheme were transferred to the Education Department of State Government. 2.2 Further, when the ND Scheme was transferred to the Government of Rajasthan, the Central Government issued a Seniority list of all Junior Instructor Gr. I (NDS) vide Memorandum dated 16.03.1973. In seniority list name of the petitioner appears at S. No. 529. Since candidates who were possessing higher qualifications were also recruited with him for the post of Junior Instructor Grade II, later they all were appointed to the post of Junior Instructor Gr. I. 2.3 The petitioner remained in Central Government Service w.e.f. 22.05.1963 to 28.02.1973. From 01.03.1973 the petitioner's seniority was under control of the State Education Department. The petitioner before absorption to the State Government Service was asked to submit his option. The petitioner alongwith other NDSI's opted to work under the State Government to facilitate the work of absorption and maintaining seniority of NDSI's in their cadre whereby service rendered in the Central Government by NDSI's shall be counted for the purpose of eligibility for appointment to next higher post in the service. The petitioner after completing 36 years of service was retired on Superannuation on 31.12.2000. 2.4. The petitioner after completing 36 years of service was retired on Superannuation on 31.12.2000. 2.4. The petitioner was taken under the administrative control of the State Government was provided the pay scales on equated post in the State Government. Some of the colleagues of petitioner who were Junior to the petitioner preferred writ petition No. 6001/1994 and 1050/2004 before this Court, Jaipur Bench, which were decided on 10.09.1997 and 21.07.2006 respectively. In compliance of the court orders dated 10.09.1997 and 21.07.2006, petitioners therein were granted pay scale with retrospective effect i.e., the date from which their Juniors were allowed Higher pay Scale. 2.5. It is evident that respondents instead of acting in reasonably have acted in biased manner i.e. who were absorbed in the State Government service but were not given retrospective benefits of promotion in consonance with the verdict of this Court. Hence this writ petition. 3. The defense taken by the respondents in their reply inter-alia is that the petitioner was absorbed into the post of P.T.I. Grade-III way back in the year 1973. Since the year 1973 till year 2000, petitioner was getting service benefits including confirmation, promotion, annual increments, D.A., ACP etc. The petitioner retired from service on 31.12.2000. Since then, he is getting pensionary benefits in accordance with the statutory rules. However, petitioner has filed the instant writ petition at a belated stage i.e. after passing of 44 years of his absorption and after 16 years of his superannuation. Even the decision of writ petitions, which have been relied upon, were decided 10-11 years ago. 4. In the aforesaid backdrop, I have heard rival contentions of the learned counsel for both the parties. 5. Concededly, there is no quibble about the fact that those of the counter-parts of the petitioners, who were likewise matriculates, but had rendered 10 years of work experience on the feeder post of P.T.I Grade III were accorded promotion on the post of P.T.I. Grade II with effect from 22.12.1975. 6. It so appears that the said benefit was granted to the counterparts of the petitioners, as they had approached this Court by filing appropriate writ petitions and those were allowed in their favor. 7. No doubt, ordinarily the relief is to be accorded only in person and not in rem and therefore, those who chose not to come to the Court cannot take undue advantage claiming parity. 7. No doubt, ordinarily the relief is to be accorded only in person and not in rem and therefore, those who chose not to come to the Court cannot take undue advantage claiming parity. However, having seen the judgment rendered by Jaipur Bench of this Court in the case of Desh Raj Singh and Others vs. State of Rajasthan and Others in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6001/1994, it is held therein that the action of the department was not in accordance with law. This being the position, it was expected of the department to apply the law across board to all those, who were similarly/equally placed. 8. For ready reference, the relevant part of the judgment rendered in Desh Raj Singh (Supra) is reproduced herein-below: “14. The petitioners are senior to some of the NDSIs, who are promoted to PTI Gr. II, on the ground that they are graduates prior to 22.12.1975. No justification has been shown for the cut off date, though some petitioners have also obtained the degree of graduation after 1975, but they are ignored. Not only that the Rule itself provides that who will be eligible for promotion to the post of PTI Gr. II in fact under the Rules, 1971, the petitioners are also eligible for promotion to the post of PTI Gr. II, though they were only matriculate. Under the Rules the person who is graduate having five years experience on the post of PTI Gr. III is eligible for promotion to the post of PTI Gr. II and the person who is Secondary or Higher Secondary with certificate in Physical Education and having 10 years experience on the post of PTI Gr. III is also eligible for promotion to the post of PTI Gr. III. The relevant Rule reads as under: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 (2) Physical Training Instructors Grade-II 50% by promotion and 50% by direct recruitment Graduate or equivalent examination with diploma in Physical Education or Secondary with 4 years diploma in Physical Education Physical Training Instructors Grade-III Graduate or Equivalent examination recognised by Government of Rajasthan with certificate of Physical Education and 5 years experience on the post mentioned in column No. 5 1. Dy. Director of Education of the range Rangewise Secondary or Higher Secondary with certificate in Physical Education and 10 years’ experience on the post mentioned in column No. 5. 2. Dy. Director of Education of the range Rangewise Secondary or Higher Secondary with certificate in Physical Education and 10 years’ experience on the post mentioned in column No. 5. 2. On D.E.O. to be nominated by the Director of Education (P&S) 3. One expert to be nominated by the Director On 22.12.1975 the petitioners though matriculate but have 10 years experience on the post mentioned in Column No. 4 of the schedule annexed to Rules, 1971. 15. Mr. Saxena submitted that for promotion to the post of PTI Gr. II, Rules have been amended in 1979, therefore, no benefit can be given to the petitioners. It is true that amendment has been made in qualification and experience. In case of promotion to the post of PTI Gr. II, vide notification dated 1.9.79, but prior to that even PTI Gr. III having degree of graduation were also not eligible for promotion to the post of PTI Gr. II. But they were promoted with effect from 22.12.1975. 16. Mr. Katta has also brought to my notice a letter dated 11.4.1986 (Annexure-8A) written by Joint Director (Primary) Primary and Middle Education, Rajasthan, Bikaner addressed to Deputy Secretary Education, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur, whereby recommended the case of non-graduate NDSIs, who are re-designated as PTI Gr. III having 10 years experience of the post of PTI Gr. III, for promotion to the post of PTI Gr. II. 17. On perusal of the qualification for promotion from the post of PTI, Gr. III to PTI Gr. II. The only difference between the petitioners and persons who were promoted w.e.f. 22.12.1975 is that PTIs who are promoted are degree holders prior to 22.12.1975. While the petitioners were having the certificate of Secondary or Higher Secondary. The requirement under the Rules is that graduate with five years experience is enough to promote to the next higher post and if he is matriculate then he should have 10 years experience. If the petitioners are matriculate and have 10 years experience, they are also entitled for the promotion to the post of PTI Gr. II, in 1975 if their junior is/ are promoted to the post of PTI Gr. II on 22.12.1975. 18. If the petitioners are matriculate and have 10 years experience, they are also entitled for the promotion to the post of PTI Gr. II, in 1975 if their junior is/ are promoted to the post of PTI Gr. II on 22.12.1975. 18. Thus, considering the terms and conditions 10 and 11 annexed to the letter of Director dated 26.9.1976, as well as clause (vi) and (vii) of Rule 6C of the Rules, 1971 and interseseniority list of NDSI, who are placed under the control of State Government w.e.f. 1.3.73 cannot be changed and when they are equated with. PTI Gr.111 all are entitled for promotion in 1975, who completed 10 years service. Their candidature should be considered for promotion to the post of PTI Gr. II. The NDSIs who are matriculate/ secondary or higher Secondary having 10 years experience on the post mentioned in column No. 5. They should be promoted to the post of PTI Gr. II, from the date when their Junior (Junior as NDSI in Central Government) are promoted. 19. It is, therefore, directed that if any person Junior to petitioners has been promoted to the post of PTI Gr. II w.e.f. 22.12.1975 or there after, the petitioners who are only matriculate, but having 10 years experience, on the date of promotion of their Junior, and otherwise suitable for promotion to the post of PTI Gr. II, they should be promoted to the post of PTI Gr. II, from the date when their junior has been promoted, with all consequential benefits. The promotion on the post of PTI Gr. II and consequential benefits be given to petitioners within three months from the date of this order. In the result the writ petition is allowed as Indicated above.” 9. The factual position is not disputed and since the petitioners herein are similarly situated, as those in the case of Desh Raj (supra), they ought to have been also given the benefit as given to their counter parts. Trite law it is that equals cannot be treated unequally and so is the constitutional mandate under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 10. Be that as it may, even otherwise, there is no gainsaying that it does appear to be a case where the petitioners have themselves not remained vigilant enough. Trite law it is that equals cannot be treated unequally and so is the constitutional mandate under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 10. Be that as it may, even otherwise, there is no gainsaying that it does appear to be a case where the petitioners have themselves not remained vigilant enough. Therefore, they cannot be given undue advantage for their own fault for not having sought enforcement their rights by instituting appropriate proceedings. At the same time, one cannot be oblivious to the nature of relief sought by them, which is, no doubt, recurring and so is the cause of action, as it arises on day to day and month to month basis, as and when the petitioners are given lower pension than their counterparts due to the erroneous approach adopted by the respondents. 11. In the premise, it is held that the petitioners shall not be entitled to any financial benefits prior to three years of filing the instant writ petition. 12. With these aforesaid observations, the writ petitions are allowed and the respondents are directed to accord the petitioners same benefits of promotion with effect from the same date as given to their counter-parts. However, financial benefits shall stay confined as stated aforesaid. The arrears starting from three years before filing the instant writ petition be calculated accordingly and be paid to the petitioners within a period of three months from today by according them the benefits of re-fixation of their pay and consequent revision in their pension. In the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners states that in order to give quietus to the matter, the petitioners are wiling to forgo interest on the arrears. This Court appreciates the fairness of the learned counsel for the petitioners. It is accordingly so ordered that the petitioners shall not be entitled to any interest on the arrears. 13. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.