Rajendra Nath Mittal, J. - (1.) THIS judgment will dispose of Civil Writ petition Nos. 234 of 1979 and 172 of 1980 which involve same questions of law. The facts in the judgment are being given from C.W.P. No. 234 of 1979.
(2.) THE Petitioners joined service as temporary Engineers in the Irrigation Branch in the State of Haryana, on ad hoc basis on January 2, 1971 and May 19, 1969, respectively. They were appointed as Assistant Engineers on regular basis by an order dated April 21, 1975 (copy Annexure P. 1). They were governed by the statutory rules called the Haryana Service of Engineers Class II, Public Works Department (Irrigation Branch) Rules, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as Class II Rules). The next promotion from the post of Assistant Engineer is to that of Executive Engineer which is governed by the Rules known as the Punjab Service of Engineers Class I P.W.D. (Irrigation Branch) Rules, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as Class I Rules). After 1974, the members of Class II Service became eligible for consideration for promotion to Class I service if they had completed 8 years of service. It is. averred that the Petitioners had completed 8 years service as Assistant Engineers/ Temporary Engineers and they had passed the departmental and professional examinations. They, therefore, became eligible for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer. The State of Haryana, Respondent No. 1 have by an order dated December 20, 1978 (copy Annexure P. 2) promoted a number of Class II Officers including Respondent Nos. 3 to 28 as Executive Engineers in -spite of the fact that they were not eligible for promotion, as Respondent Nos. 3 to 14 had not completed 8 years of service as Assistant Engineers and Respondent Nos. 15 to 28 had not passed. the departmental and professional examination as required under the Rules. It is further averred that it has not considered the case of the Petitioners, who were eligible for promotion under Class I Rules. The case of the Petitioners further is that the order Annexure P. 2 shows that the Respondents who had not passed the departmental, professional and revenue examinations had been given relaxation under Class J. Rules. But the said relaxation is illegal. They have consequently prayed that the order dated December 20, 1978 (copy Annexure P. 2) be quashed and Respondents No. 1 and 2 be directed to consider and promote the Petitioners to the post of Executive Engineer with effect from December 20, 1978, when the Respondents were promoted.
(3.) THE writ petition has been contested by the Respondents who have inter alia pleaded that the Petitioners were appointed as Assistant Engineers in 1975 and thus they had only about 3 1/2 years service to their credit when the Respondents were promoted. Prior to their appointment as Assistant Engineers, they were appointed as Temporary Engineers and according to the appointment orders, they were not entitled to any seniority or other benefit under the Service Rules, which were in force at that time. It was further stated that the period of service would not count towards increment in the time scale. It was also stated that Respondent Nos. 3 to 28 were senior to the Petitioners and were promoted as Executive Engineers in relaxation of the Rules for which there was provision in Rule 6 of Class I Rules. The Petitioners were not promoted as they were junior to the Respondents.;