Jaishree Thakur, J. - (1.) THE present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus against the respondents to determine seniority of the Assistant Engineer (Civil) in terms of the directions given by the Division Bench Judgement rendered in the case of Govind Narain Goyal vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 432/1986 decided on 16.4.1991 and with a further direction to provide for assignment of seniority to direct recruits from the date of availability of vacancies.
(2.) BRIEFLY put the petitioner was initially appointed as Junior Engineer (Civil) in the year 1980 in Public Works Department. The Rajasthan Public Service Commission invited applications for selection to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) in the Public Works Department in the year 1981. As the petitioner was eligible for selection to the said post, he applied in pursuance of this advertisement and was selected. He received a communication dated 3.11.1982 from the Commission regarding his selection however was offered appointment on the said post only on 4.2.1984. Thereafter in 1986 a writ petition came to be filed at Jaipur wherein an issue was raised regarding the total number of vacancies available in the department pertaining to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) in the Public Works Department and apportionment of the same year -wise maintaining the quota of 50% for direct recruits and 50% for promotion. The case was disposed of with the following directions: - "We, therefore, deem it proper to give the following directions and do hereby direct as under: - (1) The respondents would take into account the total number of vacancies for the period after 1st April, 1978 and apportion the same year -wise maintaining the quota of 50% for direct recruits and 50% for promotion in the light of the observations made herein above. (2) In doing so, if it is found that the vacancies against which any appointment had been made by direct recruitment and such direct recruitment was not availed by the concerned incumbent and he preferred to avail the appointment by promotion, such vacancy will not be counted towards the quota of direct recruitment. (3) As a result of the exercise, as aforesaid, if it is found that appointments had been made in any year in excess of the prescribed promotion quota, the seniority of such promotees shall be pushed down to the extent it is found necessary to maintain the prescribed quota and the seniority list dated 13th Feb., 1987 in respect of promotees and direct recruits may be re -drawn accordingly, and as a result thereof if the petitioner and other similarly situated direct recruits Assistant Engineers are found to be entitled to any consequential benefits may also be granted to them, including the seniority, promotion etc. to the next higher post of Executive Engineer. (4) The directions as aforesaid shall be carried out as early as possible, but in no case later than a period of three months from today." The department thereafter prepared a seniority list of Assistant Engineers (Civil) on 4.2.1992 in which the name of the petitioner was reflected at S.N. 418. A note was appended to this seniority list wherein it was mentioned that the same had been prepared in compliance of the judgment of the Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur dated 16.4.1991 in Govind Narain Goyal v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 432/1986. Since the seniority list of the Assistant Engineers (Civil) was not recast as per the judgment dated 16.4.1991, the petitioner issued a notice for demand of justice on 6.8.1996 followed by another notice dated 14.10.1996.
(3.) IT is contended by the writ petitioner that under the Rules of 1954, the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) is required to be filled up by 50% direct recruitment and 50% by promotion and this rule has been violated by making excess promotions on the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) and the excess posts of Assistant Engineer (Civil) by promotion have been filled in comparison to the post to be filled by direct recruitment. It is further contended that the petitioner was selected in pursuance to the advertisement issued in the year 1981 and was offered the appointment only in the year 1984 on account of the fact that there was no vacancies available at that time. If the ratio of Govind Narain Goyal's case, which has attained finality, is to be followed and then vacancies are to be determined in the ratio of 50%, for promotee and 50% for direct recruitment quotas. Aggrieved by not calculating the vacancies correctly and treating the petitioner as an appointee against the vacancies in the year 1981 -1982, the present writ petition has been filed.;