The appellant therein placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in P.O.Aggarwal Versus State of U.P. and Others 1987 3 SCC 622.
In the interview held in the year 1984, the appellants were also called and they were duly approved and selected by the Commission.
8966 of 1989 which was decided on 17.1.1990.
Respondents 3 4 were selected through the Commission and appointed directly as Assistant Engineers in the P.W.D. by order dated 9.8.1979.
The promotees were shown as juniors to the direct recruits in the seniority list.
The said promotions were made within the quota of posts reserved for the promotees according to the relevant Service Rules by the Departmental Promotion Committee companysisting of Secretary, W.D., Chief Engineer, P.W.D. and Chief Engineer Irrigation Department.
The appellants have a grievance that though their juniors were called for interview, they were number companysidered without any reason therefor.
The State Govt.
The second appellant was directly appointed as overseer substantively in the said department through the Commission on the same day.
Subsequently other orders were passed pushing back the dates of promotion still further to December 1958 for respondents 6 7 and February 1961 for respondents 14 to 23.
That Writ Petition was treated to be one in representative capacity and numberice was given to all companycerned through the newspapers.
A seniority list was published, vide letter dated 3.12.1984 issued by the Secretary.
9343 of 1990, C.P.Sharma Versus State of Uttar Pradesh and others.
By judgment dated 1.2.1991, the L.P. was dismissed by this Court.
In the meanwhile, one D.N. Saksena, who was an adhoc promotee as Assistant Engineer in the year 1970 just like the appellants and approved by the companymission in the year 1980, filed a Writ Petition in the High Court namely W.P. No.
However, the appellants were permitted to advance arguments through their companynsel at the time of hearing.
The application filed by the appellants for impleading them as parties was also dismissed by the High Court.
566 and second appellant at Serial No.
respondents 3 4 were placed at Serial Nos.
On 31.5.1979 the appellants were promoted to the post of Assistant Engineers on adhoc basis.
Those orders were challenged by respondents 1 to 5 who were direct recruits and the orders were quashed.
The judgment in the case of Saksena referred to earlier was assailed in this Court in S.L.P. C No.
The S.L.P. was dismissed on 19.11.1990.
The main ground of attack was that the companynting of the period of companytinuous officiation of the promotees from the date of adhoc appointment was against the decision of this Court in P.D. Aggarwal Versus State of U.P. 1987 3 SCC 622.
Since then, the appellants have been working uninterruptedly on the post of Assistant Engineers.
Aggrieved by the said list, respondents 3 filed Writ Petition No.
1536 of 1981.
In May, 1978 they passed an examination known as Associate Member of Institution of Engineer India , Section A and B, equivalent to B.E. Degree.
A Division Bench of the High Court upheld on 4.7.1989 the claim made by the petitioner in the said writ petition and held that the promotees would be assigned seniority from the date of companytinuous affliction and number from the date of approval by the Commission.
However that grievance is outside the scope of the present companytroversy.
Pursuant to the aforesaid judgments the State Government gave benefit of seniority to the promotees.
No promotee was impleaded as a party to the Writ Petition.
On the representation of the promotees, an order was passed by the Govt.
Srinivasan.
of U.P. inviting objections filed by the direct recruits, a final seniority list was prepared and published, vide numberification dated 11.7.1995.
684 SB of 1995 in the High Court.
A similar companytroversy inter se the promotees and direct recruits arose in another writ Petition No.
712 and 722 respectively.
on 21.7.75 changing the date of promotion of the promotees to a prior date in 1961.
claiming seniority in the post of Assistant Engineer from the date of initial appointment and officiation on the said post.
Consequently, they were companyfirmed as Assistant Engineers.
The companymission held in the year 1980, an interview of some of the promotes to be companysidered for the post of Assistant Engineers.
J. The first appellant was appointed as an Overseer re designated as Junior Engineer on adhoc basis in Public Works Department for short P.W.D , State of U.P. on 17.7.1973.
The first appellant was placed at Serial No.
The appointment orders stated that the promotion was being made to companye up with the work load in the Department since Assistant Engineers approved by the Commission were number available and that the promotions were only for a period of one year.
There also the same view was taken by another Division Bench which was challenged in S.L.P. c No.
Both the appellants were holders of Diploma in Civil Engineering.
Respondents 6 to 13 were promoted to the post in 1964 and the appellants were promoted in 1969.
