The petitioners companyplain that the list so prepared is purely arbitrary and ignores their length of service.
Prior to these rules, they were governed by the Rules framed in 1965 and revised in 1972.
The 1st and 2nd petitioners are number working as Senior Technical Officer officiating , 3rd and 4th petitioners are working as Technical Officer officiating and 5th 6th are working as Junior Technical Officer.
1889 Of 1978.
The first respondent is the Secretary to the Government, Ministry of Defence and the second respondent, Director, Directorate of Production and Inspection, Naval.
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India Subba Rao for the Petitioners.
Govind Das, C.V. Subba Rao G.D. Gupta and J.P. Sharma in person for the Respondents.
None of the petitioner have been companyfirmed in their respective posts to which they have been promoted.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition No.
Hence this writ petition.
There were numberfavourable orders.
3 to 8, as per orders of this Court dated 11.8.1983.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by, KHALID, J. The petitioners, six in number, are working in the Ministry of Defence, Department of Production.
They made representations to the first respondent companyplaining against the injustice done to them and for redressal of their griev ances.
The 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 5th petitioners joined service as Senior Technical Assistant while 4th and 6th petitioners joined as Technical Assistant.
They joined their service on different dates ranging from 1963 to 1969.
