- (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 16th August, 1983, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in C.W.P. No. 4426 of 1976, whereby the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Delhi, Was set aside and the petitioners, who are respondents Nos. 3 to 6 in this appeal, were held entitled to seniority over Shri J.D. Ratra, appellant No. 1, and the respondents Nos. 3 to. 6 were also held to be entitled to all consequential reliefs accruing therefrom. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that appellant No. 1 was appointed as a Cashier in the service of the Central Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as the Bank) on 28th November, 1960 and was promoted as a Head Cashier on 29th July, 1963. Admittedly, respondents No. 3 to 6 were promoted as Head Cashiers on dates subsequent to 29th July, 1963. The promotion policy for promotion to the post of a Chief Cashier was formulated by the bi-partite settlement of 30th January, 1970. The aforesaid settlement dated 30th January, 1970 was later modified by the subsequent settlement of March 24, 1972. Clause (6) of the said settlement with regard to promotion to the post of Chief Cashier reads as under :- "6. These Head Cashiers posts will be filled up on the basis of groupwise seniority as on 1.8.1971 of the existing Head Cashiers in category 'E' and 'C' in respective grounds." Pursuant to the settlement of March 24, 1972, respondent Nos. 3 to 6 were promoted as Chief Cashiers/Head Cashiers in the officer cadre with effect from 1st August, 1971. Appellant No. 1, who was senior to respondent Nos. 3 to 6, in the category of Head Cashiers was not promoted to the post of Chief Cashier. He, therefore, through the Union, raised a dispute and the said dispute was referred to Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Delhi, for adjudication with the following terms of reference : "Whether the action of the management of Central Bank of India in not promoting Shri J.D. Ratra to the post of Head Cashier w.e.f. 1st August, 1971 is justified ? If not, to what relief is be entitled." The Central Government Industrial Tribunal, by its award, dated 29th April, 1976, directed the Bank to promote appellant No. 1 to the post of Head Cashier in officer Cadre/Chief Cashier with effect from 1st August, 1971, in preference to respondents No. 3 to 6. Aggrieved by the said award, respondent Nos. 3 to 6 filed a writ petition bearing No. 4426 of 1976 in this court. The respondent-Bank, however, did not challenge the award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal. As stated above, the writ petition filed by respondents 3 to 6 was allowed by a learned single Judge of this court vide judgment, dated 16th August, 1983. The present appeal has been filed by the a appellants against the said Judgment. Mr. Balram Gupta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants, drew our attention to clause 6 of the settlement dated 24th March, 1972 and submitted that in terms of the said clause, the appellant No. 1 being senior to respondents No. 3 to 6 was :entitled to be promoted as Chief Cashier/Head Cashier in the officer cadre with effect from 1st August, 1971 in view of the fact that the said respondents who were junior to appellant No. 1, were promoted as Chief Cashier with effect from 1st August, 1971. He further submitted that in terms of the said clause, the Head Cashiers, who were working in category 'E' and 'C' were entitled to be considered for promotion to the post of Chief Cashier, and the learned single Judge erred in holding that the cashiers who were working Category 'E' were treated to be senior to the Cashiers who were working in Category 'C'. Shri H.S. Sawhney, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-Bank, reiterated the findings of the learned single Judge and submitted that there was no merit in the appeal and as such the appeal should be dismissed. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the records. From clause 6 of the settlement, dated 24th March, 1972, it is clear that the existing Head Cashiers in category 'E' and 'C' were eligible for consideration for promotion to the post of Chief Cashier/Head Cashier in the officer cadre, on the basis of Group-wise seniority. There is no mention in the settlement dated 24th March, 1972 to the effect that the existing Head Cashiers working in Category 'C' will not be entitled to be considered for promotion to the post of Chief Cashier/Head Cashier in the officer Cadre. In this connection, reference may be made to clause 9 which reads as under :- "9. Any Head Cashier in category 'C' who has refused to undertake the responsibilities of category 'B' or in category 'E' for the post of officer Head Cashier in the post, will, however, not be eligible for promotion to officer cadre." From Clause 9 of the settlement, it is evident that any Head Cashier in category 'C' would not be eligible for promotion to the post of Head Cashier in officer cadre only if he had refused to undertake the responsibilities of Category 'E'. It is not the case of the respondents that appellant No. 1 had ever refused to undertake the responsibilities of category 'E'. Since, appellant No. 1 was admittedly senior to respondents No. 3 to 6 as per the seniority list of Head Cashier, copy of which was annexed to the petition as Annexure P-5, appellant No. 1 was entitled to be promoted as Chief Cashier/Head Cashier in officer cadre with effect from 1st August, 1971 in terms of clause 6 of the settlement. In view of the above discussion, the judgment, dated 16th August, 1983, passed in C.W.P. No. 4426 of 1976, is set aside, and the respondent-Bank is directed to promote appellant No. 1 to the post of Head Cashier in the officer cadre/Chief Cashier with effect from 1st August, 1971. During the course of arguments, we were informed by the learned counsel for the parties that 3 out of 4 affected respondents have already retired and the 4th respondent is also going to retire in this year. Keeping in view these facts, we direct that appellant No. 1 shall be deemed to have been promoted as Chief Cashier with effect from 1st August, 1971 immediately below respondents No. 3 to 6. The parties are, however, left to bear their own costs.;