Gokal Chand Mital, J. - (1.) IN the absence of Rules or Executive instructions, the seniority list of members of a service has to be fixed on the basis of length of service or it can be fixed on the basis of rota in the ratio in which person came into service from three sources, is the point to be determined in this writ petition.
(2.) . The cadre of Block Development and Panchayat Officers (for short BDPOs) was created in October, 1960 with effect from 1st November, 1959. Shiv Dayal Singh and Harbans Singh Gill joined as BDPO in November, 1962 as direct recruits on being selected by the Punjab Public Service Commission. Respondents Nos. 3 to 9 came into service of BDPOs between 7th September, 1963 to 11th June, 1966, not as direct recruits but from other sources. On 26th April, 1966, seniority list of BDPOs as recorded till 31st December, 1962 was issued, in which the seniority was fixed on the basis of rota system and not on the basis of length of service. The covering letter issuing the seniority list is Annexure PIA reading of this letter shows that since recruitment to BDPOs was to be made from three different sources in the ratio of 55 percent 30 percent 15 percent, rota system on the basis of the percentage was mentioned in that document and seniority was fixed accordingly. The Petitioners felt aggrieved and filed representations. On 24th October, 1972, the Government again circulated seniority list, as it stood on 31st July, 1972. The same is Annexure P. 5, in which the Petitioners were placed above Respondents Nos. 3 to 9 on the basis of length of service. Thereafter, by notification dated 22nd January 1974, the Government of Punjab published rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India, regarding the recruitment, seniority and other conditions of service of the BDPOs, known as "The Punjab Development and Panchayat (Class II) Service Rules, 1974 (for short the Rules)". Rule 13 of the Rules provided for framing inter se seniority on the basis of continuous length of service.
(3.) IN the year 1975 another seniority list Annexure P8 was issued, - -vide covering letter Annexures P7, dated 28th, August, 1975. This seniority list was prepared on the basis of rota formula. The Petitioners were brought down. Feeling aggrieved, Petitioner No. 1 filed representation Annexure P9 on 17th September, 1975. Thereafter, without considering the representation, another tentative seniority list Annexure P1 was issued with covering letter Annexure P10, dated 21st October, 1979, in which Petitioners were shown below Respondents Nos. 3 to 9, on the basis of rota formula. Again, Petitioner No. 1 filed representation dated 7th November, 1979, Annexure P12. When the representations were not being decided and the seniority list was not being finalised, the present petition was filed. It may be noted that Civil Writ Petition No. 1459/1977 was filed by the other persons to challenge the seniority list, which was published with the letter dated 31st March, 1975, and while that writ petition was pending) the seniority list Annexure P11 was published on 21st October, 1979. Civil Writ Petition No. 537 of 1980 was filed by another person to challenge the seniority list issued in October, 1979. As already noticed, since representation of petition No. 1 was not being decided, this writ petition was filed and during the pendency of this writ petition, the State Government finalised the seniority list and circulated the same by order dated 27th February, 1984. The same is Annexure P13, in which also the seniority was fixed on the basis of rota system. Since the Petitioners were not satisfied with that seniority list, the writ petition was amended to impugn the same.;