10 14.
176 300 with the posts of Agricultural Officer, Grade I of the former Bombay State in the scale of Rs.
C. Agarwala, K. K. Singhvi, R. K. Garo, S. S. Bhattnagar and Y. J. Francis, for respondent Nos.
Accordingly, we allow the petition and quash the resolution of the Government dated 9 9 1960 and companybined seniority list issued by the Government on 22 8 1962.
If the State Government wants to alter the basis of equa tion originally fixed on 17 2 1958, an opportunity to make representation against the proposed alteration has to be given to the persons likely to be affected.
1962. .
1 shall equate the posts of Agricultural Assistant of the former Hyderabad State in the scale of Rs.
1 fails to decide the question of equation of posts held by the petitioners in the former Hyderabad State in accordance with law, and the observations in this Judgment within three months from 9.12.71, Respondent No.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 9th December, 1971 of the Bombay High Court in Special Civil Application No.
The appellant and another person had also filed Special Civil Application No.
1 and three other Agricultural Officers lodged a Special Civil Application No.
C. Bhandare and M. N. Shroff, for respondent Nos.
1126 of 1971 in the Nagpur Bench for quashing the Resolution of the Bombay Government of 16th May, 1969, on certain grounds.
There the appellant No.
The application was then disposed of, ex parte, on merits by the High Court in favour of the applicants.
This, as already numbericed, led to the Special Civil Application No.
High Court.
20 24.
The neces sary companyrespondence of quashing of these two orders is that the intermediate order of absorption which is necessary step after inter se seniority and gradation list can be companypiled is also to be quashed.
The Court further directs that if respondent No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by GOSWAMI, J. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the High Court of Bombay of 9th December, 1971, in Special Civil Application S.C.A. No.
They were, however, allowed by this Court on 23rd January, 1969, to withdraw the same without prejudice to all parties affected to make representations to the Government in accordance with section 115 of the States Reorganisation Act,.
1366 of 1968 in this Court.
1354 of 1970 under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Even the first two respondents, namely, the State of Maharashtra and the Director of Agriculture, went by default, although a belated prayer to enter appearance had been made through companynsel on behalf of the State of Maharashtra after companymencement of arguments, on the day of final hearing, which was, however, rejected by the.
They prayed in their said application for a writ to set aside the Bombay Governments Resolutions of 17th February, 1958 and 16th May, 1969 and the provisional gradation list of 27th September, 1969 and the promotion orders of 5th and 6th June, 1970 and other companysequential reliefs.
The Nagpur Bench of the High Court allowed the Writ application by its judgment and order dated 6th December, 1967 and the operative part of the same may be quoted.
1354 of 1970 at the instance of respondents, 1 to 19 and the operative part of this impugned order of 9th December, 1971, is in the following terms For the reasons stated in the accompanying judgment, the Court makes absolute with companyts the rule granted by it on 30.6.70 in terms of the prayer a of the petition.
Respondents 1 to 19 were the original petitioners in S.C.A. No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
210 10 300 and to absorb the petitioners and to fix their seniority on that basis with effect from the 1st day of November 1956.
N Pliadke, Naunit Lal and Lalita Kohli, for the appellant.
The appellants and the first nineteen respondents and respondents 22 to 24 are at present the employees in the Agriculture Department of the State of Maharashtra following reorganisation of States on 1st November, 1956.
They had impleaded in the said application five respondents, the first two being the State of Maharashtra and the Director of Agriculture, Maharashtra and the remaining three respondents were the three Agricultural Officers impleaded in a representative capacity by leave of the High Court under order 1, rule 8, Civil Procedure Code.
The State Government will number take an appropriat e action.
These respondents Nos.
The respondents, who were Agricultural Officers from Hyderabad region,, preferred an appeal against the judgment of the Nagpur Bench being No.
1227 of 1972.
1354 of 1970.
From Bombay we may number turn to the Nagpur Bench of the said High Court.
They were officers from the former Hyderabad State piior to the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, briefly called the Act .
3 to 89 are companycerned, dated 11.5.
1354 of 1970.
Respondents 1 to 19 and others companytested the application before the Nagpur Bench unsuccessfully.
The Government of Maharashtra passed a Resolution of 16th May, 1969, purporting to be an order giving new equation of posts in the Agricultural Department in pursuance of which a gradation list was made on 27th September, 1969.
application in the Bombay High Court and it is alleged that they had numberinterest in the matter and were in companylusion with the appellants.
That matter is still pending in the Nagpur Bench.
Then followed certain companysequential orders of promotion of 5th and 6th June, 1970.
3 to 5 did number appear to companytest the.
It is number disputed that the order of the High Court directly affects the interests of the present appellants, who are Agricultural Officers from the Madhya Pradesh region.
The respondents 1 to 19 were impleaded as respondents in that application and although they had been served, they did number file any return when the said application came up for hearing at Nagpur on 2nd February, 1972.
361 of 1964 impleading the State of Maharashtra and 88 other respondents, including the present respondents 1 to 19.
