YN603C II and YN622C work together?

Hello,
Is there anyone who tried having YN603C in speedlights and YN622C mounted on camera hot shoe? is it working fine? Thank you in advance.

not compatible

I understand that having a YN622C on the camera and a 603C transmitter on top allows 622C remotes to be fully controlled, and 603C remotes to be fired.

Shankar: I think the difference in the two preceding answers stems from your question being open to interpretation (and misinterpretation!).

IF you mean: "Can the YN622C on camera directly control YN603C-equipped remote flashes" then Scott's answer is entirely accurate.
IF, on the other hand, you mean: "Can you combine a YN622C plus YN603C on-camera to remotely control some flashes with YN622C-equipped remote flashes PLUS some other flashes with YN603C triggers" then Clive's answer is the correct one.
A YN622C on-camera transmitter cannot directly control YN603C remotes, but it CAN send the 'FIRE!' signal through the hot-shoe to a YN603C used as a piggy-back transmitter. There has to be a direct physical connection of the YN603C through the YN622C hotshoe.

Frequently, it is possible to piggy-back two incompatible systems to get some form of function (for example, I can have a YN622C on top of an original model Pixel King on the camera and use them each to control two different sets of flashes). However, finances and available equipment notwithstanding, the whole business becomes very unfriendly to use. Inevitably, the remote flash which you wish to change power will be the one connected to the limited-function YN603C trigger receiver.

SO the answer to your question as asked is MAYBE. It's not the vastly different answers above which are confusing, it's the question which isn't suifficiently specific. Hope that clears up any confusion. If finances permit, it's far far easier to run on just one trigger system to the exclusion of all others.

Similarly, it is possible to have some flashes triggered by radio while others are simply triggered optically. It's certainly possible, but it creates more problems than it answers.

Stick with a single triggering system if utterly possible and you'll create far less operating problems for yourself. That way you can concentrate on the photography and not the equipment.
Otherwise, it'd be like driving a car and having someone shout in your LEFT ear "Turn RIGHT" while at the same moment someone is shouting in your RIGHT ear, "Turn LEFT" - utter confusion of messages to the CPU between your ears!

Sorry for the delay in reply ... Thank you very much for the reply Phil, Clive, Scott. I will try doing as you suggested, and let me also try to post some images of experimentation .
Phil, I agree with you - the last lines