I.M. Quddusi, J. - (1.) By means of this petition the petitioners have prayed for a writ in the nature of Certorari quashing the seniority lists dated 24.7.1991, 25.7.1991, 5.5.2000, and 2.11.2000 issued by the opposite party No. 2 as contained in Annexures No. 5, 6, 7 and 11, respectively, as well as for quashing for order dated 21.11.2000 contained in Annexure 10 to the writ petition.
(2.) Brief facts of the case are that all the petitioners were appointed on their posts on 16.2.1999, 14.8.1997, 10.2.1999, 23.2.99 and 24.2.1999, respectively. According to the petitioners there are two modes for filling up the post of Lower Division Assistants under, the opposite parties. These are (1) through Public Service Commission, U.P., Allahabad, and (2) by promotion from Junior Grade Clerks, Telephone Operators and Typists. According to the petitioners the total strength of the cadre is 886 out of which 532 posts are to be filled up by direct recruitment and remaining 354 posts are to be filled up by departmental promotion.
(3.) The crux of the matter in this writ petition is that the petitioners who were recruited for direct recruitment on the post of Lower Division Assistants (redesignated as Assistant Review Officer) have challenged the seniority list dated 2.11.2000, contained in Annexure 11 to the writ petition as also the seniority lists dated 24.7.1991 and 25.7.1991, contained in Annexures 5 and 6 to the writ petition stating that the relevant Rules providing quota rota system viz. U.P. Secretariat Ministerial Staff Service Rules, 1942 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules of 1942'), Rule 8 of U.P. Public Servants Seniority Rules, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules 1991') and U.P. Secretariat Ministerial Staff Rules, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules of 1999') enforced with effect from 19.2.1999, have not been followed while preparing the said seniority lists and thus the action of the opposite parties is arbitrary and discriminatory.;