NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA,J. - (1.) Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the present appeal is covered by decision of this Court in D. B. Special Appeal Writ No.1090/2019 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.24621/2018 decided on 19.07.2019 and it be disposed of in terms of the said order. Order dated 19.07.2019, reads as under:- "1. The appellants are aggrieved by the rejection of their writ petition. They had approached the Court under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the order of State Government, which provided that in the event of vacancy of Village Level Worker-cum-Panchayat Secretary (VLW-cum- PS) in Gram Panchayats for any reason, additional charge would be given to another Village Level Worker-cum-Panchayat Secretary in the Gram Panchayat of nearby vicinity and not to employee or other staff member including Clerk Grade-II in the same Gram Panchayat. 2. This litigation was proceeded by another series of writ petitions, which had challenged the impugned order, whereby the earlier policy decision of the State Government with regard to filling up on temporary basis the post of Village Level Worker- cumPanchayat Secretary, was challenged. During the pendency, the State took a decision to withdraw that order. In the interregnum, petitioners and others holding the post of Clerk Grade-II in the same Gram Panchayat had been given additional charge as Village Level Worker-cum-Panchayat Secretary. With the withdrawal of earlier Government order; subsequently, the State came out with the impugned policy. 3. The writ petitioners/appellant claimed to be aggrieved inasmuch as experience gained by them was invaluable and that the additional charge ought not to be given in respect of vacancy in Village Level Worker-cum-Panchayat Secretary cadre and rather, it ought to be filled from amongst people in the same Gram Panchayat, evading regular recruitment. This argument did not find favour with the learned Single Judge who rejected the writ petition and imposed a cost of ₹ 5,000/- to be paid by each of the petitioners to the Rajasthan High Court Bar Association, Jaipur and RSLSA, Jaipur. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants argued that the learned Single Judge fell into error in making the impugned order. It is urged that the previous arrangement whereby staff and employees in the same Panchayat continued on additional charge basis for salutary and conducive to public interest. It is also urged that the learned Single Judge completely failed to take into account of legitimate expectation of the appellants that they or others like working in the same Panchayat and having knowledge of working and duties of Village Level Worker-cum-Panchayat Secretary, ought to continue. 5. This Court noticed at the outset that the cadre of Village Level Worker-cum-Panchayat Secretary cannot be filled by Clerk Grade-II; it is not even a promotional post in their line or cadre. In these circumstances, there could not have been any expectation and much less legitimate expectation that they would ever get to discharge duties of Village Level Worker-cumPanchayat Secretary. 6. What was done in the past was purely fortuitous and on account of administrative exigency under the internal arrangement, as a matter of discretion and based upon the convenience of the administration. 7. Having regard to the overall circumstances and the nature of position, which State found itself hemmed by the previous litigation, on this aspect, it has chosen now to ensure that the vacancy in the post of Village Level Worker-cumPanchayat Secretary, are mend by others, who are given charge of Village Level Worker-cum-Panchayat Secretary on additional basis, who are holding regular appointment in nearby Panchayats. This argument is clearly in the public interest. 8. The Court is further of the opinion that the learned Single Judge's direction to pay cost cannot be construed as unreasonable. Having regard to the overall circumstances, yet in the peculiar circumstance, it is, hereby, reduced; instead of ₹ ₹ 5,000/- each petitioners shall pay 1,000/- to the Rajasthan High Court Bar Association, Jaipur and RSLSA, Jaipur. 9. In view of above, the appeal is dismissed." Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of in terms of order dated 19.07.2019 passed by this Court in D. B. Special Appeal (4 of 4) [SAW-1200/2019] Writ No.1090/2019 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.24621/2018 titled as Asha Ram Meena and Ors. Vs. The State of Rajasthan and Ors. reproduced above. ;