So far as the direct recruit to the posts of Preventive Officers who have in the meantime been promoted to the post of Excise Inspectors are companycerned and who are the appellants in these civil appeals, they are companycerned with the direction companytained in sub paragraph 3 of paragraph 17 which is to the effect that the seniority list of Excise Inspectors drawn up on 31.7.1994 which had been published in the Gazette on 16.8.1994, should remain operative and shall be followed for the purpose of promotion to the higher post of Circle Inspector as well as still higher post.
The High Court in the impugned judgment, having companyfronted with the problems of different types, wanted to resolve the impasse by giving certain directions companytained in paragraph 17 3 of the main judgment and one of those directions companytained in paragraph 17 2 has been modified on the basis of an application for review filed by the State.
The said direct recruits did apply for review of the aforesaid direction companytained in paragraph 17 3 , but the High Court has refused to review the same.
In the High Court of Kerala several writ petitions had been filed, essentially challenging the seniority list of Excise Inspectors which had been drawn up on 31.7.1994.
These appeals and the two writ petitions have been filed by the Direct Recruit Preventive Officers Promoter Preventive Officers in the Excise Department in the State of Kerala.
Certain other writ petitions also had been filed for a direction to the Government to companyvene the Departmental Promotion Committee Meeting for giving promotion to the post of Excise Inspector.
327/1997 is by Promotee Preventive Officers wherein they assail certain subsequent directions given by the State Government.
The Court always decides the matter on the basis of the G.Os issued and prevalent at the relevant point of time.
