Shri Ravi sir,
Have you noticed that you have shifted the discussion from Prahlada and Markanteya to Rama?
The concept of Atma afaik is from vedaantha and it may not be easy to differentiate between one atma and another. Advaitha, visishtadvaitha, etc., are probably not clear about the pristine appearance of an atma. (I am not well-read, so if this is not correct, please guide me.) But in the actual world all atmas are the same, only their baggage by way of karmas differs.
Rama's case, you will agree, stands on a different plane if you consider only his avataara aspect. But once we set that aside, he also was born a prince, had to go compulsorily to the forests with visvamitra, break siva's bow to win the hands of sita, get exiled because of intrigue by kaikeyi which had its roots in Dasaratha's promise to Kaikeyi's father that the kingdom would be given to Kaikeyi's son, lose his wife due Ravana's kidnapping, kill Ravana with the help of monkeys (killing vaali from hiding, to earn sugriva's alliance), vibheeshana, etc., and finally Rama believed a dhobi's gossip and exiled pregnant sita to end her fate by sinking back into the earth. The kingdom (Ramarajya) was divided between Lava and Kusa. Viewed from this angle, Rama comes out no different from many kings with their personal faults, weaknesses, sorrows, tragedies in personal life, etc. So, theoretically Rama's atma is no different from any other ordinary king's.
Your argument of different sorta Atma, I think is a confusion arising from different sort of karma baggage. But then all of us can and should aim for the highest level. Your argument looks to me like you are in favour of reservations for different sorta Atma like ours'. That is what I say, is creating different religion, one for us and one for the real bhaktas (whom you have cleverly abandoned and clasped Rama!).
Let us be honest at least to our conscience and to God.