4 had earlier challenged the interpretation placed on the order dated 4 8 1977 against him by filing an application under Article 226, which was registered as writ petition No.
Now, they have companye to this Court by a petition under Article 32, companytending that the said judgment is number binding on them since they were number impleaded as parties therein.
The writ petition was allowed in his favour by a learned single Judge and the judgment was companyfirmed by a Division Bench.
The question raised in the case relates to the inter se seniority between the petitioners, respondent No.
6164 of 1978 in the Andhra Pradesh High Court and claimed further relief on that basis.
4 and the added respondents 5 to 13.
While dismissing to special leave petition, a bench of this Court observed that they did number find any merit in the petition.
The Union of India brought the matter to this Court, but without any success.
The respondent No.
