M.KATJU,J. - (1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for a mandamus directing the respondents to count the petitioner's ad hoc service from 16 -2 -1973 to 4 -5 -1981 towards his total length of service for preparing the seniority list. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) IN para 3 of the petition it is stated that 30 posts were advertised for making ad hoc appointments on Group II posts under U.P. Subordinate Agriculture Service Rules, 1977. The petitioner applied and was selected amongst others vide order dated 17 -2 -1973 Annexure 1 to the writ petition. The petitioner joined on 16 -2 -1973 as Soil Conservation Inspector in pursuance of the above appointment letter. In para 9 of the petition it is stated that the Group II posts were advertised by the U.P. Public Service Commission for regular appointment in 1977 -78 and the petitioner applied and was duly selected and was given appointment letter dated 4 -5 -1981 vide Annexure 4 to the petition. The petitioner was promoted from Group II to Group I post i.e. from the post of Horticulture Inspector to Senior Horticulture Inspector vide order dated 27 -5 -1984 Annexure 5 to the petition. A tentative seniority list was published on 14 -3 -1990 of Group II employees and the petitioner's seniority was at serial No. 101 and his date of appointment was shown as 4 -5 -1981 and his ad hoc service on the said post from 16 -2 -1973 was ignored. A true copy of the tentative seniority list is Annexure 6 to the petition. Without finalising the tentative seniority list of Group II the respondents published another tentative seniority list dated 30 -4 -1991 of Group I in which also the petitioner service from 16 -2 -1973 were not counted vide Annexure 7 to the petition. The petitioner filed objections against both these tentative seniority lists vide Annexure 8 to the petition but the same have not been decided. True copies of the reminders are Annexures 9 and 10 to the petition. In para 15 of the writ petition it is stated that the petitioner has been given regular increment since 16 -2 -1973. The petitioner was given officiating appointment as District Horticulture Officer by order dated 12 -8 -1999 Annexure 12 to the writ petition. It is alleged in para 19 of the petition that the work of the petitioner is outstanding and he was given special appreciative entry dated 6 -2 -2001 vide Annexure 13 to the writ petition. However, subsequently the charge of District Horticulture Officer was taken away from the petitioner without any rhyme and reason and posts are lying vacant. It is alleged in para 21 of the petition that 30 posts of District Horticulture Officers are vacant and promotions are to be made accordingly. In para 22 of the petition is stated that the tentative seniority lists has not been finalised and the petitioner's objections have not been decided. Aggrieved this writ petition has been filed.
(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents. We have perused the same. It is not disputed this fact that the petitioner has been working since 16 -2 -1973. However, it is disputed by the respondents that the petitioner is entitled to seniority from 16 -2 -1973. Rule 5 of the relevant rules states: Subject to general control of the Government recruitment in service whether in substantive or in officiating vacancies or to temporary post should be made by the Director of Agriculture U.P. ;