- (1.) This appeal is at the instance of the Union of India and others and it is directed against the judgment of P. K. Banerjee, J. whereby the Rule obtained by the respondent No. 1 Deb Kishore Chatterjee was made absolute.
(2.) The respondent No. 1 was appointed a Viewer 'D' on Jan. 8, 1962 in the Metal and Steel Factory at Ishapore. On Dec. 10, 1962, he was promoted to the post of Fitter 'B' and thereafter to the post of Fitter 'A' on Nov. 16, 1964. Ultimately, he was promoted to the post of Supervisor 'B' Grade (Tech). He has been made quasi-permanent in the said post since March 15, 1968. The next higher grade of post to which he may be promoted or eligible for promotion is the post of Supervisor 'A' Grade (Tech) in the scale of Rs. 205-280/-. On June 1,1972, the appellant No. 3. the General Manager, Metal and Steel Factory, I shapore, issued an order being Order No. 452, Part II promoting the respondents Nos. 2 to 5 to the post of Supervisor 'A'. The said respondents Nos. 2 to 5 are juniors to the respondent No. 1 in the post of Supervisor 'B'. The appellant No. 3 also subsequently issued three more orders of promotion being Order No. 469, Part II, Order No. 53, Part II and Order No. 233, Part II dated respectively June 12, 1972, Jan. 15, 1973 and March 28, 1973 promoting the respondents Nos. 6 to 12 from the post of Supervisor 'B' to the post of Supervisor 'A'.,' The said respondents are also juniors to the respondent No. 1 in the post of Supervisor 'B'. The respondent No. 1 protested against his supersession to the appellant No. 3 who. by his letter dated July 3, 1972, informed the respondent No. 1 that the promotions to the grade of Supervisor 'A' were made on the basis of seniority of highly skilled workers, Supervisor 'B' Grade (Tech), Examiners/Viewer 'A' Grade and other Skilled Workers 'A' Grade, and that the seniority was determined strictly in order of dates of drawing of the pay of Rs. 175/- per month irrespective of inter se seniority within the same grade. The respondent No. 1 made another representation to the appellant No. 3 by his letter dated July 10, 1972. In reply, the appellant No. 3 stated in his letter dated July 17/19, 1972, that no further representation would be entertained in that regard. Thereafter the respondent No. 1 made a representation to the appellant No. 2, the Director-General of Ordnance Factories. In reply to the same, the appellant No. 3 intimated the respondent No. l as per the direction of the appellant No. 2, that the procedure of preparation of dovetailed seniority list on the basis of drawing of pay of Rs. 175/- per month for the purpose of consideration of cases for promotion to Supervisor 'A' had been operative for a long time and nothing new had been implemented thereby. In the Rule, the respondent No. 1 challenged the seniority list prepared on the basis of one's drawing the pay of Rs. 175/- per month. He inter alia prayed for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the appellants to forbear from giving effect to the policy or the procedure of preparation of seniority list on the aforesaid basis. He also prayed for a similar writ directing the appellants to forbear from giving any effect or further effect to the said orders promoting the respondents Nos. 2 to 12 to the posts of Supervisor 'A'.
(3.) Banerjee, J. came to the findings that by preparing a dovetailed seniority list on the basis of one's reaching the scale of Rs. 175/- per month was illegal and contrary to and inconsistent with the statutory rules framed under Art. 309 of the Constitution. In that view of the matter, his Lordship held that the seniority list and promotions given on the basis of the policy decision made by the executive instruction could not be sustained. Accordingly, he quashed the said policy decisions as contained in Annexures 'A' and 'D' to the writ petition. Hence, this appeal.;