- (1.) SINCE all these writ petitions are directed against the order dated 25.10.99 as common question is involved, all the abovesaid four writ petitions are decided by this common order.
(2.) BEFORE proceeding in this case it is pertinent to mention here that how these cases came to be listed before me. For this I would like to cite the proceedings taken in the case of Ajay Singh vs. Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal & Others (1) This writ petition was listed before this Court on 13.3.2000. On that date, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shiv Kumar Sharma made it exception and ordered that the writ petition be placed before another Bench. Again, the matter came to be listed on 17.4.2000 before Justice Ashok Parihar and on the request it was ordered that this writ petition No. 791/2000 be listed along with S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 775/2000. On 28.4.2000 these writ petitions came to be listed along with writ petition No. 444/2000 and these writ petitions were admitted and notices were issued. On 31.7.2000, on the request made by the respective parties all the aforesaid four petitions were ordered to be listed together for final disposal. On 30.05.2001, when the matter came up for final disposal, Hon'ble Justice V.S. Kokje expressed that since he has pronounced a decision in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2968/2000 that day, these petitions required to be re-heard in the light of the aforesaid case and the matter was ordered to be listed for hearing in the first week of July, 2001. Thereafter, the matter was listed on 26.4.2002 and arguments were partly heard by Hon'ble Justice PP Naolekar and the matter was posted for further arguments. Since Hon'ble Justice PP Naolekar was elevated as Chief Justice of Guwahati High Court, the matter was listed before the regular Bench. On 27.11.2002 the regular Bench observed that these cases are part heard of me. But the record was perused and it was found that these cases were never marked as part heard of me, therefore, the matter was again placed before Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice. The Acting Chief Justice vide order dated 16.12.2002 placed the matter before the regular bench and since these cases have already been made exception by Hon'ble Shiv Kumar Sharma, J., the matter was again place before the Acting Chief Justice and vide order dated 17.12.2002 the matter was ordered to be listed before me. On 20.12.2002, the arguments were heard and since learned counsel for both the parties agreed to exchange their written submission, they were directed to file their written submissions and order was kept reserved. In appeal No. 791/2000 Shri C.K. Garg learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide order dated 10.2.1992, the respondent State had promoted several personal to the post of Selection Scale of Rajasthan Administrative Service against the vacancies of the year 1991-92 on the basis of merit. The petitioner was also promoted against the vacancies of the year 1991- 92. The order dated 10.2.1992 was further reviewed by the respondent No.2 in a review D.P.C. and, again on 22.7.1993 another promotion order was issued whereby, the respondent No.3 Smt. Pramila Surana, was promoted against the vacancy of year 1991-92 in the selection scale of R.A.S. And vide order dated 23.2.1996 the petitioner was promoted against the vacancies of the year 1991-92 on the basis of merit.
(3.) SMT. Pramila Surana, respondent No.3 challenged the order dated 23.2.1996 by way filing an appeal before the respondent No.1 wherein she claimed that the order dated 23.2.96 be declared null and void so far it relates to the appellant whereby her year of allotment of selection grade against merit cum seniority quota has been lowered down from 1991-92 to 1992-93. On 17.9.1996, respondent No.1 called for the record of the respondent No.3 and after examining the APARs and other relevant record he gave a categorical finding that the respondent No.3 was not meritorious enough for promotion against the vacancy of 1991-92. The respondent No.3 challenged the order dated 17.9.1996 by way of filing writ petition before this Court. This court without reversing or disturbing the findings given by the respondent No.1 accepted the writ petition vide order dated 16.12.1997. The respondent No.2 preferred a D.B. Special Appeal against the order dated 16.12.97 and same was rejected vide order dated 13.11.98. ;