S. B. Sinha, J. - (1.) The appellants and the private respondents herein were appointed as Lower Division Assistants/Junior Assistants between the period 28-9-1966 and 5-9-1973. Recruitment process was undertaken by the Orissa Public Service Commission in terms of the Orissa Ministerial Service (Method of Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Lower Division Assistant in the Office of the Department of Secretariat) Rules, 1951 (for short, the OMS Rules, 1951). After their appointments, the appointees were recruited in various departments. With a view to avail promotional opportunities, the appointees were required to pass an examination known as STC Examination. All the employees admitted were promoted after they had passed the said examination. The private respondents passed the examination before the appellants herein and as such they were promoted earlier. On or about 1-1-1984, a Gradation List was published wherein the respondents were shown senior to the appellants herein. The appellants contended that having regard to the fact that seniority of the ministerial officers was to be reckoned on the basis of ranks obtained by them in PSC examination; only because some employees working in some departments were sent for training earlier than the others which enabled them to pass the STC examination before them, the respondents could not have been treated to be senior by reason of such fortuitous circumstances.
(2.) Representations were made by the appellants before the State of Orissa. The State issued a circular dated 21-2-1989 purporting to set up new principles for fixing seniority in the cadre of Lower Grade Assistants in the higher grade and consequently a corrected Gradation List was published on 22-8-1990.
(3.) The legality and validity of the said circular dated 21-2-1989 and the Gradation List dated 22-8-1990 came to be questioned by the respondents herein before the Orissa Administrative Tribunal (for short, the Tribunal) which was marked as O.A. No.1200 of 1990. Some of the appellants herein also filed an original application, which was marked as O.A. No.90 of 1990, praying for a direction that the common 1984 Gradation List be revised and consequently the 1990 Gradation List which was published pursuant to the circular letter dated 21-2-1989 be upheld. Both the aforementioned original applications were disposed of by a judgment and order dated 9-3-1992, holding : ". . . . . .We, therefore, have no hesitation in holding that the gradation list drawn up as per Home Department letter No.10535/F dated 21-2-1989 and consequently refixation of seniority in the Home Departments letter in Memo No.24961/CC dated 22-5-1990 and by Home Depart-ments Memo No.56814 dated 22-8-1990 are illegal and hereby quashed. All the future promotions above the rank of Senior Assistants and Section Officer, Level-II shall be governed by the gradation list made in the year, 1984 and the promotions given effect to accordingly. The principle decided shall govern all the cases i.e. O.A. 1200/90, C.A. 1037/90, OA 817/90, OA 783/90, OA 516/90 and OA 90/90. The prayer in O.A. 90/90 is dismissed relating to quashing of the Gradation list of 1984. The other five petitions are allowed and our order will govern the seniority of all Senior Assistants and Section Officer Level II. . . . ." ;