The appellants joined the organisation as Assistant Compilers in May June 1970 whereas Respondents 5, 6 and 7 were also appointed as Assistant Compilers on 2 6 1970 and Respondent 8 had been appointed on 22 7 1970.
In the gradation list of Statistical Assistants, which was published on 1 1 1986, only Appellant 1 had been shown and Respondents 5 to 8 had number been shown, though they had been recruited by that date.
After the recruitment rules came into force, the Government took the task of companysidering the cases of all ad hoc promotees in different ranks by companystituting a Departmental Promotion Committee, and on the basis of the recommendation of the said Departmental Promotion Committee, regularised the services of different employees in different ranks.
Needless to mention that neither in the earlier proceedings when Respondents 7 and 8 challenged the order of reversion number in the subsequent proceedings before the Tribunal, when Respondents 5 and 6 claimed seniority in the gradation list, the present appellants had number sic been arrayed as parties.
These appeals are directed against the judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, before whom the appellants had claimed seniority over Respondents 5, 6, 7 and 8 in the cadre of Statistical Assistant under the Census Organisation.
As a result of such steps taken by the Government and as a result of the process of selection held by the Departmental Promotion Committee, Respondents 7 and 8 were reverted from the post of Statistical Assistant to the post of Computer.
It may be stated that in the gradation list which had been published prior to the rules companying into force as well as even after the rules companying into force, the appellants had been shown senior to the respondents.
There were numberrecruitment rules then in force, and persons were promoted on ad hoc basis to the posts of Computers and then also to Statistical Assistants.
In the Census Organisation, the hierarchy of posts starts from Assistant Compiler and then Computer, Statistical Assistant, Tabulation Officer and then Investigator.
The reversion order of the second respondent as aforesaid was challenged before the Tribunal, but the Tribunal rejected their claim.
The recruitment rules came into force in the year 1973.
The matter was then carried to this Court in Civil Appeal No.
Hence the present appeals.
3819 of 1989.
