- (1.) THESE 12 applications under Article 32 of the Constitution are by Assistants covered by the Central Secretariat Service Rules, 1962 ('Rules' for short), and challenge is to the select list for the grade of Section Officers for the years 1978, 1979 and 1980, and the common seniority list dated April 26, 1979, as also the provisional supplementary list of Assistants dated August 21, 1980. They have further prayed that the select list and senioritylist be re published on the basis of length of continuous service in the grade of Assistants and promotion to the grade of Section Officers be granted from the dates when Assistants junior to them were promoted as Section Officers.
(2.) THE Rules framed under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution came into force from October 1, 1962. Under the Rules, the Central Secretariat Service was constituted and as per Rule 3 there are four grades in the Service classified as follows : (i) Selection Grade (Deputy Secretary to the Government of India or equivalent) ; (ii) Grade I (Under Secretary to the Government of India or equivalent) ; (iii) Section Officers ; (iv) Assistants. The first two grades are classified as Central Civil Service, Grade 'A', while the other two are known as the Central Civil Service, Grade 'B' Ministerial. Posts in the first three grades are gazetted while posts in the Assistants' Grade are non gazetted. The Rules contemplate that there shall be separatecadres in respect of Section Officers' grade and the Assistants' grade and these shall be constituted for each Ministry or office specified in col. 2 of the First Schedule. Under Rule 4, a single point gradation list in respect of officers of the Selection Grade and Grade I for all the Ministries or offices specified in col. 2 and for the offices specified against such Ministries or offices in col. 3 of the Schedule is to be maintained. The Rules contemplate direct recruitment as also promotion in respect of certain grades.
(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioners the quota rule had broken downs direct recruitment had not been made in many years and on account of such failure, fixation of seniority with reference to the rotational method was not available to be followed. The petitioners also contended that select lists as contemplated by the Rules had not been framed for quite a long period and in the absence of such a select list framed in time, select lists of 1978, 1979 and 1980 prepared without following the criterion of length of service of officers in the grade of Assistants was not only unfair and arbitrary but worked out prejudicially to the petitioners. The main grievance of the petitioners in short is that the schemefor fixation of seniority and consequently the provisions relating to promotion having not worked out as contemplated, the manner of determination of seniority should be usual rule of total length of service and action taken otherwise should be struck down and seniority should be directed to be re determined on the basis of length of service only.;