The decision of the Delhi High Court was upheld by this Court by dismissal of the special leave petition on August 12, 1985, Thereafter Rule 26 was amended on July 12, 1985.
The Tribunal by its judgment dated July 23, 1987 reaffirmed validity of the merger of the two branches but it quashed the amended Rule 26 and companysequently the seniority list prepared on that basis was also quashed.
The amended Rule 26 was challenged before the Central Administrative Tribunal.
An application for clarification of this Courts order was then made which was disposed of by order dated August 30, 1988.
The High Court by its judgment dated May 13, 1982 rejected the challenge to the merger of the Executive and Ministerial branches but it struck down Rule 26 as invalid.
1997 1 SCR 791 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by S. VERMA, J. The main point for decision in this writ petition and the companynected matters is the companystitutional validity of Rule 26 of the Delhi Administration subordinate Service Rules, 1967 for short Rules as amended on May 19, 1989.
The Executive and Ministerial Class III services were merged by numberification dated December 4, 1980 and the seniority in the integrated cadre was to be reckoned on the basis of their placement in the cadre.
The Tribunals order was challenged in this Court by a special leave petition which was dismissed on February 12, 1988 but it was held that the amendment to Rule 26 made on July 12, 1985 is prospectivcly valid.
A writ petition was filed in the Delhi High Court to challenge this act of merger of the Executive and Ministerial branches as well as Rule 26 of the said Rules which provided for determination of the seniority on merger of the two branches.
A brief background of this challenge is necessary to indicate the narrow companypass in which the companytroversy number survives.
