ARUN MADAN, J. - (1.) BOTH the above -named appeals filed under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance, 1949, arise out of the order, dated 7th October, 1992 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3170/1987, one filed by the State of Rajasthan and the other by Gopal Lal Sharma and others. Since both the above appeals arise out of a single order passed by learned Single Judge of this Court, they are disposed of by this Single common order.
(2.) BRIEF facts giving rise to the filing of the aforesaid two appeals are that Dhanraj, respondent in Appeal No. 870/93 who was petitioner in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3170/87 viz Gopal Lal Sharma and others and the appellants in appeal No. 352/93 were selected for appointment to the post of Labour welfare Officers subject to the provisions of Rule 8 of the Rajasthan Labour and Welfare Service Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1958') in order of merit as per the list prepared by Rajasthan Public Service Commission (For Short 'RPSC'), Under Rule 20 of the Rules of 1958 vide order, dated 16th December, 1982 pursuant to combined competitive examination held by the RPSC for the year 1980. It has been stated in the writ petition that the State Government vide its order, dated 21st September, 1982 superseded the seniority list of the officers prepared earlier by orders dated 24th October, 1981 and 21st September, 1982 and seniority list prepared by order, dated 26th April, 1983. It has been further stated that the substantive vacancies which arose between the initiation and constitution of service from 1967 (17) to 39 in 1980 were classified into vacancies which were required to be filled up by direct recruitment and by promotion in the ratio of 50:50 in accordance with Rule 7 of the Rules of 1958.
(3.) THE writ petition was contested by the State Government, appellant in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 870/93 and respondent in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 352/93 and the plea taken by the State Government was that respondents in appeal No. 870/93 as well as the other appellants in the connected appeal were not entitled to be promoted to their next cadre from the post of Labour Welfare Officers because the promotions were given in respect of posts governed by direct recruitment quota from the initial constitution of service.;