- (1.) The present revision petition has been filed under Section 115 of the Code of Code of Civil Procedure by Petitioners for setting aside order dated 16.12.2002 passed by learned Executing Court.
(2.) I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully including the impugned order passed by learned Executing Court.
(3.) Facts relevant for the decision of present revision petition are that a suit was filed by Respondents-Plaintiffs, namely, Raj Kumar and Sham Lal against the present Petitioners, i.e., Defendants No. 1 and 2 and Defendants No. 3 to 12, which was decreed by learned trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 5.3.1997, operative part of which reads as under: In view of my findings on the above issues, the suit of the Plaintiffs succeed partly and a declaratory decree to the effect that the seniority of the Plaintiffs has not been correctly fixed in the seniority list circulated by the Defendants on 7.6.83 and they are entitled to be pleased above Defendants No. 4 to 6, 11 and 12 and are entitled to be considered for promotion from the dates on which any of these Defendants was promoted and they will be given promotion if they are found fit for promotion from that date. However, the Plaintiffs will be entitled to get arrears of salary, if any, only for a period of 38 months immediately preceding the date of filing of the suit. The relief of permanent injunction has not been pressed by the learned Counsel for the Plaintiffs as Defendant Nos. 6 to 9 have already been given promotion during the tendency of the suit, as such the suit qua permanent injunction is dismissed. Parties are left to bear their own costs.;