- (1.) AMITAVA Lala, J. According to the petitioners, all of them are presently employed in Greater NOIDA Authority and are posted on the post of Manager Grade-I (Engineering ). Greater NOIDA Industrial Development Authority Service Regulations, 1993 (hereinafter called as 'regulations, 1993') was promulgated in 1993. Service conditions including appointment, promotion and seniority of the employees of Greater NOIDA are governed by such Regulations. Regulation 16 (1) has been shown to us to satisfy the test of recruitment which is quoted hereunder leaving aside irrelevant parts: "16. Source of recruitment.- (1) Recruitment of any post under the Authority may be made from any of the following sources - (a) by direct recruitment; (b) by promotion from amongst the employees occupying posts carrying a lower scale of pay; (c) by deputation or on contractual basis; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "
(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioners, there is no provision for absorption of employee on deputation by the authority although it has been provided as one of the mode. There is no clear cut policy of absorption/merger of the employees. However, some of the deputationists were absorbed even without any clear cut policy but on the basis of Regulation 76 of the aforesaid Regulations. Such regulation is quoted hereunder : "76. Regulation of other matters.- In regard to the matters not specifically covered by these regulations, persons appointed to the Service shall be governed by the rules, regulations and orders applicable generally to Government servants serving in connection with the affairs of the State:" According to the petitioners, the respondent No. 3 belonged to the Development Authorities, Centralised Services. After serving under the Lucknow Development Authority, he was posted as Junior Engineer in Ghaziabad Development Authority. Vide Government Order dated 13th July, 1999 addressing all the Vice-Chairman of the Development Authorities and Chairman of the Special Region, Development Authority, U. P. , the State Government invited applications for appointments on deputation on the post of Junior Engineer, Assistant Engineer and Executive Engineer in the Industrial Development Authorities. The Industrial Development Commissioner also constituted a committee to make selection and recommend appointment on different posts in the Industrial Development Authority. The respondent No. 3 submitted his application showing his willingness and applied for the post of Manager (Civil ). According to the petitioners, such post is equivalent to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil), but since he was Junior Engineer in his parent department, he was recommended by the committee for appointment on equivalent post of Assistant Manager (Civil ). Appointment letter was issued on 25th April, 2000. The respondent No. 3 joined accordingly. According to the petitioners, after about one year the respondent No. 3 submitted an application to the Greater NOIDA Authority for granting him the benefit of service rendered by him in his parent department. The respondent No. 3 was ultimately absorbed on the post of Assistant Manager (Civil) with effect from 28th July, 2001 after various clarifications. Such clarification arose with regard to knowledge of Software Engineering etc. , Seniority of the respondent No. 3 on the post of Assistant Manager (Civil) shall be from the date of absorption and on production of qualification of Software Engineering within six months from the date of absorption and subject to satisfaction of the authority. However, in compliance with order dated 26th February, 2002 the respondent No. 3 joined on 27th February, 2002. According to the petitioners, his seniority is to be reckoned with effect from the date of absorption i. e. 26th February, 2002. Past service of the respondent No. 3 cannot be taken into account for the purpose of seniority since he was not a Government servant as per the Uttar Pradesh Absorption of Government Servants in Public Undertakings Rules, 1984 (hereinafter called as the 'rules, 1984' ). The definition of "government servant" as given under Rule 2 (d) of Rules, 1984 is quoted hereunder : "2 (d) "government Servant" means a person appointed to a Public Service or a post in connection with the affairs of the State of Uttar Pradesh in permanent capacity in a pensionable establishment;" The petitioners contended that since the respondent No. 3 was not holding any post in a pensionable establishment, such Rule cannot be applicable in his case. To establish such submission, the petitioners referred to paragraph-6 of a supplementary affidavit filed by an Under Secretary to an appropriate authority in some other Writ Petition No. 1589 (S/b) of 2002 (Om Prakash Tewari v. State of U. P. and Anr. ). There the deponent stated that aforesaid absorption Rules are not applicable to the petitioner therein since the petitioner is substantive appointee of Centralised Service cadre of Nagar Vikas Development and being so, is not a Government servant.
(3.) HOWEVER, we have to go by the legal interpretations not by the deposition of a deponent in the affidavit of some other matter. Ultimately the petitioners have made the following prayers in this writ petition: " (i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 2-6-2006 passed by the respondent No. 1; (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to give effect to the impugned order dated 2-6-2006 during the pendency of the present petition; (iii) issue any other writ, order or direction that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case; (iv) award cost of this petition to the petitioners. " From the prayers it appears that the petitioners are affected by the order dated 2nd June, 2006. From the perusal of the order impugned it appears to us that such order is passed by the Principal Secretary, Department of Industrial Development, Government of Uttar Pradesh on the basis of the representation made by the respondent No. 3 in compliance with the order dated 19th May, 2003 passed by the High Court in the Writ Petition No. 2778 of 2003 (Dharam Raj Singh v. State of U. P. and Ors. ).;