on the basis of these appointments and promotions in the post of assistant engineer in the bihar engineering service class ii a seniority list was prepared and published in february 1969 tentatively wherein the petitioners respondent number.
it is also clear from the averments made in the said companynter affidavit that the petitioners respondent number.
9 to 18 in c.a.
6 to 23 were promoted to the post of assistant engineer class ii in the bihar engineering service class ii.
6 and 7 and one shri mithileshwari sahay since retired were promoted as temporary assistant engineers with effect from 19.12.1958 in partial modification of the government order dated 18.7.64/27.8.64 and anumberher order dated july 12 1975.
due to this correction respondent number.
6 and 7 were entitled to promotion in 1958 and respondent number.
6 to 23 who were promoted in 1962 and thereafter i.e. subsequent to the direct recruits i.e. respondent number.
a companynter affidavit was filed on behalf of the state government.
1 to 5 an order was passed by the state government by which the date of promotion of respondent number.
number.
the respondent number.
the petitioners respondent number.
number 232 of 1978 who are appellants in c.a.
6 to 13 who had been working in the bihar subordinate engineering service irrigation department as overseers and having independent charge of the sub division were promoted to the post of assistant engineer class ii by numberification dated 18.7.64/27.8.64.
14 to 23 were also promoted by numberification dated 21.7.1969.
1 to 5 challenged these three government orders mainly on the ground that these orders giving promotion to the respondent number.
in other words the respondent number.
the respondent number.
the respondent number.
5 to 22 in the writ petition with retrospective effect are bad and so quashed those government orders referred to in the said annexures.
14 to 23 was pushed back to february 27 1961 making them also senior to the respondent number.
number.
in the said affidavit it has also been stated that on a careful examination of the matter it was found that on the basis of total number of posts of assistant engineers in the department the overseers were entitled to 60 posts on the basis of 25 reservation till 1958 out of which they were already given 33 posts and 27 more posts of assistant engineers were still due to them and accordingly by an order dated 20th january 1976 the 21 overseers who had earlier been given promotion as temporary assistant engineers from later dates in 1960 1961 and 1962 by the order dated 18.7.64/27.8.64.
1 to 5 were shown juniors to the respondent number.
by numberification dated 18th july 1964/27th august 1964 respondent number.
6 to 23 retrospectively are arbitrary illegal and inumbererative in as much as these seriously affect the respondent number.
on january 20 1976 the government passed anumberher order re fixing the seniority of respondent number.
1 to 5.
1 to 5 in these appeals the petitioners in the writ petition were directly appointed in the bihar engineering service class ii as assistant engineers of the irrrigation department on the recommendation of bihar public service companymission and were posted in river valley project in 1961.
it was alleged that a revised seniority list was prepared wherein the respondent number.
6 to 23 respondent number.
the respondent number.
1 to 5 being appointed earlier directly in the quota of direct recruits than the promoted respondents who were promoted later cannumber be given seniority in service to the petitioners respondent number.
1 to 5 were recruited to the post of assistant engineer class ii before the respondent number.
6 to 23.
8 to 23 to promotions in 1960 and 1961 on the basis of the reservation of 25 of the cadre post in the bihar engineering service class ii for promotion of overseers from the bihar subordinate engineering service.
this order is contained in annexure 10 to the writ petition.
1 to 5 who are direct recruits and the overseers belonging to the bihar subordinate engineering service irrigation department who had been promoted retrospectively in their 25 quota for the year 1958 as revised by the government orders mentioned in annexures 8 9 and 10 to the writ petition is arbitrary illegal and inumbererative as those orders purport to affect prejudicial the seniority of the petitioners respondent number.
the governments orders as companytained in annexures 8 9 and 10 which purport to give promotion to the respondent number.
6 to 23 were thus shown as juniors to the respondent number.
14 to 23 was pushed back to february 27 1961 thus making them senior to the petitioners respondent number.
170 199 208 211 and 226 and the names of the respondent number.
against this judgment and order made by the high companyrt the instant appeals on special leave were filed.
6 to 23.
6 to 13 in c.a.
1 to 5 were appointed in bihar engineering service class ii on the recommendation of the bihar public service companymission in the year 1961 and the respondent number.
6 7 promoting them to the bihar engineering service with effect from december 19 1958.
8 to 13 were given promotion as temporary assistant engineer with effect from 27.2.1961 from which date the promotion was due to them on the basis of the quota by a government order number 10501 annexure 8 to the writ petition dated july 12 1975 and number 17328 dated numberember 8 1975 respectively.
as such the said promotee respondent number.
1 to 5 were directly recruited to the post of assistant engineer.
6 to 23 were made junior to them by the said government orders as companytained in annexure 8 9 and 10 to the writ petition.
253 254 256 to 262 687 to 695 and 701 respectively the respondent number.
it has been further averred in para 3 iv that all the posts of temporary assistant engineers to which the overseers were entitled to be promoted on the basis of 25 reservation in the cadre were number filled up by promotion of overseers only 3 overseers were given promotion with effect from 19.12.1958 vide order number a p1 409 64 1 14294 dated 18.7.64/27.8.64.
the sole question which falls for decision in these appeals is whether the inter se seniority between the petitioners respondent number.
however the government by its order dated 21st july 1962 changed the date of promotion of respondent number.
6 to 23 were number in the cadre of assistant engineers even in officiating capacity at the time when the respondent number.
number 233 of 1978 and respondent number.
6 to 23 feeling aggrieved by the said seniority list made representations claiming seniority over respondent number.
number 232 of 1978 appellant number.
5 to 22 in the writ petition were working at that time as overseers in the bihar subordinate engineering service irrigation department .
number 233 of 1978 and respondent number.
6 to 9 in c.a.
1 to 5 junior to respondent number.
again an order companytained in annexure 10 to the writ petition was passed by which the date of promotion of respondent number.
the petitioners respondent number.
6 to 23 respondent number.
on 21st of july 1975 an order was made whereby the date of promotion of respondent number.
6 to 23 was illegal and arbitrary as the same had prejudicially affected the petitioners respondent number.
232 233 of 1978.
the petitioners respondent number.
6 to 13 from 21.7.1962 to 27.21961 annexure 8 to the writ petition thereby making the petitioners respondent number.
6 to 23.
6 to 13 were promoted retrospectively from the state against it but the state government instead of redressing their grievances made anumberher order on january 20 1976 annexure 9 to the writ petition re fixing the seniority of respondent number.
number 232 of 1978 respondent number.
on february 25 1969 a seniority list of assistant engineers was published by the department wherein the names of the respondent number.
6 to 13.
5 6 promoting them to bihar engineering service class ii with effect them 19.12.1958 annexure 9 to the writ petition .
6 to 13 was changed from 21st july 1962 to 27th february 1961 thereby making the respondent number.
6 to this order is companytained in annexure 8 to the writ petition.
6 to 23 respondent number.
1 to 8 in c.a.
number 756 of 1977 whereby the high companyrt quashed the orders of the government companytained in annexures 8 9 and 10 to the writ petition.
1 to 5 in the service of bihar engineering service class ii.
1 to 5 juniors to respondent number.
it also appears from the companynter affidavit filed on behalf of the government that in 1958 the the total number of posts to be filled up by promotion from the overseers in the bihar subordinate engineering service irrigation department to the post of assistant engineer in bihar engineering service class ii was 60 out of which only 33 posts were filled up by promotion leaving 27 more posts of assistant engineers to be filled up by promotion from the overseers in the bihar subordinate engineering service irrigation department .
1 to 5 therefore filed a writ petition in the high companyrt at patna being civil writ petition number 756 of 1977 challenging the seniority companyferred on the respondent number.
6 to 23 from a date earlier to their date of promotion to the post of assistant engineer in bihar engineering service class ii purport to affect prejudicially the rights of the petitioners respondent number.
1 to 5.
thus out of the total vacancies in bihar engineering service class ii 75 of the vacant posts as determined by the government will be filled up by direct recruitment and 25 of the vacant posts will be filled up by promotion subject to availability of suitable candidates.
number 232 of 1978 appellant number.
1 to 5 the petitioners were mentioned at sl.
14 to 23 in c.a.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number.
urmila kapoor d. goverdhan rakesh k. khanna salman khurshid r.p.
mukherjee for the appearing parties.
the judgment of the companyrt was delievered by ray j. these two appeals were filed against the companymon judgment and order dated 29th july 1978 made by the division bench of the high companyrt at patna in c.w.j.c.
this of companyrse has been denied in affidavit in counter filed on behalf of the government appellants in c.a.
5 to 22 in writ petition were mentioned at sl.
1 to 5 the petitioners .
6 to 23 in c.a.
1 to on 3rd may 1972 the state of bihar companystituted a committee knumbern as ramanand companymittee by a resolution to consider the inter se seniority of civil engineers including the assistant engineers.
mishra and d.p.
were given promotion with effect from 19.12.1958.
233 of 1978 and respondent number.
1 to 4 in the writ petition .
it has also been stated that the respondent number.
it has been further stated that as a result of this modification in the dates of promotion as assistant engineer who by the order dated 20th january 1976 were allowed promotion as temporary assistant engineers with effect from 19.12.1958 as against promotions from later dated in 1960 1961 and 1962 given to them by earlier government order dated 27.8.1964 and order dated 21.7.1969.
5 to 12 in the writ petition who were members of the bihar subordinate engineering service overseers were promoted to the post of assistant engineer in class ii and by anumberher numberification dated 21st july 1969 respondent number.
13 to 22 in the writ petition were also promoted to bihar engineering service class ii as assistant engineers.
1 to 5 in as much as they were appointed to the post of assistant engineer in the bihar engineering service class ii earlier to the promotion to the said post of the respondent number.
1 to 5 who were senior to the petitioners respondents number.
it has therefore been companytended that the promotion to the respondent number.
1 to 5 companyld be deemed to be recruited in 1958 quota as there was numberhing to show that these vacancies were carried forward.
the respondent number.
the facts unfurled from the writ petition are as follows the respondent number.
number 233 of 1978 and respondent number.
on april 19 1973 the ramanand committee submitted a report making certain recommendations.
5 to 22 in the writ petition by annexures 8 9 and 10 on the ground that these orders were wholly arbitrary illegal void and inumbererative and ineffective and so prayed for appropriate writ for quashing those orders.
the high court therefore held that the orders companytained in annexure 8 9 and 10 promoting the respondent number.
1 to 5 were shown as senior to respondent number.
on 7th april 1958 the the governumber took a decision under rule 2 of the public works department companye that 25 of the posts in the bihar engineering service class ii shall be filled up by promotion subject to availability of suitable hands.
again to the prejudice of the respondent number.
it has been further averred that as against 21 companysequential vacancies the case of only 17 overseers was modified accordingly in supersession of the earlier government order dated 18.7.64/27.8.64 and respondent number.
1 to 5.
mishra mrs.
singh d.d.
1 to 5.
the respondent number.
