AHMADI - (1.) LEAVE granted in S.L.P. (Civil) No. 8726 of 1992.
(2.) THESE writ petitions, with a Civil Appeal, a Contempt Petition and a review petition have arisen out of several orders passed by this Court as well as by the High Court of Allahabad, coupled with certain acts and omissions on the part of the State of Uttar Pradesh. The main dispute relates, to the seniority and promotion of employees in the clerical cadre of the Food and Civil Supplies Department of the State of Uttar Pradesh. The Uttar Pradesh Food and Civil Supply Department consists of 3 wings, viz., Marketing Wing, Supply Wing and Weights and Measures Wing. The head of all the three wings is the Commissioner, Food and Civil Supplies. The channels of promotion in the Marketing Wing and in the Supply Wing from the lower rank to the higher rank are as under: JUDGEMENT_138_3_1997Image1.jpg JUDGEMENT_138_3_1997Image2.jpg Appointment to the post of Marketing Inspectors and Supply Inspectors are made from two sources : (i) by direct recruitment; and (ii) by promotion from the lower cadres mentioned above, in the ratio of 1 : 1. To put the facts chronologically, it would be proper to refer to an order of this Court dated 20-1-1984 in a batch of special leave petitions from the judgment and order of the High Court of Allahabad dated 29/09/1983 reported as Sheo Dutt Sharma v. State of U. P., 1984 (Supp) SCC 190 : (AIR 1984 SC 634). The petitioners in that group of petitions were promotees to the cadre of Marketing Inspectors. Although a seniority list was proposed to be prepared, promotions to the rank of Marketing Inspectors were occasionally made on temporary or on ad hoc basis during the procurement seasons, and reversions at the end of such seasons followed as a matter of course. As a large number of Marketing Inspectors were sought to be reverted in this process, they filed a Civil Miscellaneous Writ No. 6763 of 1983 in the High Court of Allahabad and obtained an interim stay from the vacation Judge and thus continued to function under Court orders as Marketing Inspectors. The writ petition was subsequently dismissed by a Division Bench of the High Court which held that the promotions were ad hoc and up to and inclusive of 31/08/1983 and therefore, they had no right to the post of Marketing Inspector. The High Court, however, ordered that those of the promotees who could be accommodated within the 50 Per Cent quota for them in the regular posts, subject to reservations for Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes, should be so accommodated. The State of Uttar Pradesh submitted before this Court in appeal that a seniority list of clerical staff dated 10-1-1983 would be treated as the final seniority list and would be the basis for promotion to the regular post of Marketing Inspectors and that promotions for seasonal requirements would be made on ad hoc basis. This Court directed, vide order dated 20-1-1984, that such seasonal promotions must be made for specific terms and outside the quota of 50 Per Cent . On behalf of the State of Uttar Pradesh, it was also submitted that individual claims of any error in the seniority list would be examined and the consequence reached on such examination would be given effect to.
(3.) THE present proceedings have been initiated on behalf of the clerical staff of the Supply Wing, seeking promotion to the posts of Supply Inspectors. THEy allege that the State of Uttar Pradesh failed to give effect to the seniority list of the clerks and many of them had to approach the High Court and this Court for promotion to the posts of Supply Inspectors as the promotions to the post of Supply Inspectors were made without following the seniority list. One such order of the High Court was challenged by way of special leave petition No. 3491/84 entitled Saroj Kumar Tyagi v. State of Uttar Pradesh on the ground that about 100 junior persons had been promoted as Supply Inspectors in violation of the petitioners' right to seniority. By an order dated 28-1-1985, this Court directed by way of an interim measure that promotions may be made of those clamouring for promotion after exhausting the list of Head Clerks dated 1/04/1976 and thereafter accommodating such of the petitioners as could be accommodated. THE final judgment in the matter was, however, made on 4-12-1987. A sympathetic view was taken for those who had been working as Supply Inspectors for quite some time, although, perhaps, they would not have been entitled to such promotion according to seniority excepting for two petitioners therein namely Saroj Kumar and Prabhu Dayal who were entitled to promotion on the basis of their seniority. THEy all were allowed to continue as Inspectors of Supply not on the basis of their seniority but on the sole consideration that they had been continuing in the promotional post for quite a long period and it would be inappropriate to revert them. However, this Court clarified that such continuation in the higher post would not confer any seniority. Simultaneously, litigation was also on in the High Court for promotion to the post of Senior Accounts Clerk from that of Clerk and to the post of Supply Inspector from that of head Clerk/Accountant. The High Court of Allahabad in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 4063 of 1986 entitled Ram Dayal v. State of U. P. passed an order dated 5-9-1988 directing the State of U. P. to take steps to promote the petitioners before the High Court as Supply Inspectors within a period of four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of that order before the appropriate authority.;