- (1.) Recruitment to the Rajasthan Administrative Service is to be made, according to rule 7 of the Rajasthan Administrative Service Rules, 1954 (for short "the Rules"), by direct recruitment through combined competitive examination and by promotion of Tehsildars in such a manner that the persons appointed to the Service by direct recruitment do not at any time exceed 75% and by promotion 25% of the total cadre strength as sanctioned from time to time. Government can in special circumstances consider recruiting persons by special selection not exceeding 5% of the total promotion quota posts in ordinary scale of the Service in any particular year.
(2.) By an order No. F. 1 (35) Perss/A-4/87 dated Feb. 26, '88, the State Government in Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms (A-4) keeping in view the provisions contained in rule 3 of the Rajasthan Services (Recruitment by promotion of vacant posts of earlier years), 1972 made officiating promotions of various persons working as Tehsildars and Devasthan Inspectors to vacant posts pertaining to the years 1982-83, 1983-84, 1984-85, 1985-86 and 1986-87 in the Junior Scale of Rajasthan Administrative Service (for short, "R. A. S.") on the basis of merit and on the basis of seniority-cum-merit within the prescribed proportion. Shambhu Singh Meena, petitioner in D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5047/91, was promoted to the Service on the basis of merit as against the vacancies in promotion quota of the year 1984-85 and he was confimed in the cadre of the Service by order dated 2-1-19&9. He was further promoted in the Senior Scale of the Service by an order dated 30-9-89 on regular basis on the recommendations of the Departmental Promotion Committee. Madho Lal Bhatt, petitioner in D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5048/9!, was promoted to the Service in the Junior Scale on the basis of merit as against the vacancies in promoion quota of the year 1981-82 by Order No. F. 1 (25) Pers./A-4/82 dated 26-2-88 and he was confirmed in the cadre of the Service by an order dated 2-1-89. Jagdish Chandra Bishnoi, petitioner in D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5049/91, was promoted to the Service in Junior Scale on the basis of merit as against the vacancies' of 1983-84 by the Review Departmental Promotion Committee, although he states that earlier, he was promoted as member of R. A. S. (Junior Scale) against the quota of 1981. Safdare Alam, petitioner in D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. M)50/9l, alleges that he was appointed on the basis of Review Departmental Promotion Committee of 1981 on officiating basis in the cadre of R. A. S. (Ordinary Scale) by an order dated 14-3-1984 and was later on selected on the recommendations of the DPC on the basis of merit against the quota of 1982-83 by an order dated 26-2-1988. Jagannath Agrawal, petitioner in D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5989/ 91, was promoted on regular basis on merit basis against the promotion quota of 1982-83 and was confirmed in the cadre of R, A. S. (Junior Scale) by order dated 2-1-1989.
(3.) Soon after the above two promotion orders of the petitioners promoting them to R A. S. (Junior Scale) were passed on 26-2-1988, respondents Nos. 2 to 12 filled appeals before the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal, Rajas-than, Jaipur (for short, hereinafter, "the Tribunal") against the two promotion orders dated 26-2-1988 which were decided by the Tribunal on 30-7-1991 by a common order. The Tribunal allowed 11 appeals filed before it by its order dated 30-7-91 and quashed the two orders dated 26-2-1988 whereby promotions were given to the petitioners to the Junior Scale of R. A. S. as against the promotion quota of various years on the basis of merit. This order of the Tribunal dated 30-7-1991 has been challenged by the petitioner by filing the present writ petitions in this Court on various grounds. In the appeals filed by respondents Nos. 2 to 12 before the Tribunal, following points arose for determination, namely :- (1) Whether the vacancies of the years 1972 to 1980 were clubbed and there was not proper determination of vacancies ? (2) Whether the Departmental Promotion Committee for the years 1981-82 and 1982-83 was not properly constituted ? (3) Whether the orders dated 28-1-83 and 26-6-84 had not been quashed by the Tribunal ? (4) Whether the private respondents promoted on merit basis, could not be promoted in view of Explanation below sub-rule (11) of Rule 28-B of the Rules ?;