- (1.) The 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents in the pending WP under art. 226 of the Constitution of India dated June 7, 2010 have filed the GA dated August 23, 2012 for vacation or modification of an interim order dated July 1, 2010 passed in the WP. Mr. Advocate General appearing for KMC has submitted that if the WP itself is taken up for hearing and disposal, then he will not press the GA. Under the circumstances, I have invited Mr. Gupta appearing for the petitioners to argue the WP itself.
(2.) Mr. Gupta has submitted as follows. Questioning a modification of the regulations for recruitment to Manager cadre in KMC general service mentioned in a circular dated May 6, 1998 (WP p.107) the five petitioners working in KMC as direct recruit Deputy Manager brought this WP. They questioned the principle for determination of seniority in the feeder posts and the principle for promotion to the post of Manager stated in the circular. Mr Gupta has said that during pendency of the WP, KMC has issued a circular dated December 10, 2012 that has settled the seniority issue; and he has argued that in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in B. Manmad Reddy & Ors. v. Chandra Prakash Reddy & Ors., 2010 3 SCC 314the promotion principle stated in the circular dated May 6, 1998 is unsustainable.
(3.) The principle for promotion stated in the circular dated May 6, 1998 is as follows:- "Provided that 1/3 posts of the Manager Cadre will be filled up from the direct recruited Dy. Managers having 6 (six) years experience on the basis of seniority among themselves only and 2/3 of the posts of Manager Cadre will be filled up on the basis of combined Gradation List of the two above said groups i.e. from Jr. Asstt./Typist to Dy. Manager, Asstt. Manager(Welfare) and Bailiff-(Gr.-II) to Sub-Inspector fulfilling the above qualification criteria.";