Varadarajan, J. - (1.) C. M. P. No. 3068 of 1984 is by the first respondent in Writ Petition No. 1194 of 1979 (Municipal Corporation of Delhi) for a direction that having regard to changed circumstance the Corporation need not fill in the gaps in the seniority list of 1978-79 relating to Assistant Engineers by direct recruitment. C.M.P. No. 3069 of 1984 is by the petitioners in the same writ petition for taking proceedings against respondents 1 and 2 in the writ petition for contempt of this Court's order dated 13-7-1983 made in the writ petition and for directing those two respondents to forthwith implement that order and fill up the available 32 posts of Assistant Engineers from amongst the petitioners "who were qualified and eligible according to the recuitment rules" and to restrain those respondents from filling up the posts in the direct recruitment quota from amongst diploma holders on current duty charge or on ad hoc basis or in any other manner.
(2.) By our order dated 13-7-1983 we allowed prayers Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 in the writ petition as indicated in our judgment with costs and dismissed the writ petition in other respects. Prayer No. 1 in the writ petition was to direct respondent No. 1 in the writ petition to fill up 8 posts of Assistant Engineeers from amongst those in the select panel approved on 2-5-1979. As regards that prayer what has been ordered by us is this: "There is nothing wrong in respondent 1, the Corporation. proceeding to appoint Assistant Engineers (Civil) by direct recruitment as per the Recruitment Regulations or in fixing the 50:50 quota and working it out or in the selection of petitioners in Writ Petition No. 1194 of 1979 as Assistant Engineers pursuant to the decision to appoint 8 Assistant Engineers (Civil) by direct recruitment in the interviews held for that purpose on 6th and 7th March, 1979 and the respondents 1 and 2 should issue orders of appointment to those posts to 8 of the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 1194 of 1979 who are in the select list within 6 weeks from this date (13-7-1983), if not already issued as undertaken, by Mr. U. R. Lalit (Senior Counsel of respondents 1 and 2) on 29-7-1981 within five months from that date."
(3.) Prayer No. 2 in the writ petition was to quash the office order dated 11-4-1978 entrusting Junior Engineers with current duty charge of the posts of Assistant Engineers and the office order dated 21-6-1979 promoting 2 Junior Engineers as Assistant Engineers on current duty charge on their own pay scale. As regards that prayer what we have stated in our order in the writ petition is this (at pages 897-98): "Continuing current duty charge and ad hoc appointments for such a long period exceeding to the period of one year mentioned in the said memorandum dated 30-10-1976 of the Government of India is irregular though that memorandum could not be said to be automatically binding on respondent 1. What is totally wrong Is that appointment of Junior Engineers on current duty charge as Assistant Engineers has been made by the impugned order dated 21-6-1979 even after the approval of the select list prepared for the appointment of 8 Assistant Engineers without issuing orders for the appointment of even to 8 out of those persons who were in the select list. In the circumstances we hold that the appointment of those Diploma holder-Junior Engineers by the order dated 10-4-1978 and of two such Junior Engineers by the order dated 21-6-1979 as Junior Engineers on current duty charge for periods which are proved to be too long is irregular and we quash the same.";