Writ Petition (Civil) No. 936 of 2018 filed by four petitioners prays for appropriate directions that after the promulgation of Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules 2010 all appointments ought to be in conformity with 2010 Rules and allocation of seniority must be in accordance with the Cyclic Order provided in Schedule VII to 2010 Rules. In terms of 2010 Rules posts in the cadre of district Judges in the Higher Judicial Service in State of Rajasthan were required to be filled up in accordance with quota of 50 per cent for promotees, 25 per cent for Direct Recruits and 25 per cent by way of Limited Competitive Examination in keeping with law laid down by this Court in All India Judges Association vs. Union on India and Others. This Writ Petition filed by candidates who were successful in Limited Competitive Examination prays that they be allocated seniority in terms of the Cyclic Order in Schedule VII. In this group fall Writ Petition (Civil) No. 498 of 2018 and Writ Petition Diary No. 13252 of 2019 which pray that the seniority between candidates who were successful in Limited Competitive Examination and not by their erstwhile seniority. Writ Petition (Civil) No. 967 of 2018 has been filed by 37 Direct Recruits challenging the Provisional Seniority List dated 16.08.2017 with regard to the cadre of District Judges in the Higher Judicial Service in the State on the ground that the appointments made after 2010 Rules had come into effect ought to be in accordance with the Cyclic Order and the inter se seniority and placement of Direct Recruits and Promotees promoted after 2010 Rules had come into effect must be in accordance with 2010 Rules. Another Writ Petition has been filed by Rajasthan Judicial Service Officers Association seeking benefit of ad-hoc or officiating service put in by Promotees who were promoted on ad-hoc basis as Fast Track Court Judges and also prays for re-determination of vacancies of Direct Recruits submitting that the vacancies earmarked for Direct Recruits were in excess of their quota. Other Writ Petition are filed by Judicial Officers seeking similar benefit in respect of ad-hoc or officiating service as Fast Track Court Judges in the State and pray that such candidates be placed above the Direct Recruits in the cadre of District Judges in the State. Since the issues involved in all these matters pertain to appointments to and allocation of seniority in respect of the cadre of District Judges in the State of Rajasthan and regarding effect of 2010 Rules the petitions were heard together. Before we deal with the factual aspects it would be necessary to consider certain decisions of this Court touching upon the establishment of Fast Track Courts as well as the concept of promotion through Limited Competitive Examination and the respective quotas for candidates coming from three different streams in the Higher Judicial Service in various States. In All India Judges Association v. Union of India and others, the issues with regard to the working conditions of the members of the subordinate judiciary throughout the country came up for consideration. Number of directions were issued by this Court. However, review petitions were filed by Union of India seeking certain modifications or clarifications. These review petitions were disposed of by this Court while issuing further directions in All India Judges Association and others v. Union of India and others. In pursuance of said directions First National Judicial Pay Commission under the Chairmanship of Mr. Justice K.J. Shetty (former Judge of this Court) was constituted.