KISHAN MAL LODHA,J. - (1.) THESE two appeals arise out of a common judgment dated November 29, 1978, passed by the learned single Judge of this Court, by which the writ petition was allowed in part holding as under: (1) that assignment of seniority of Shri P.N. Midha over petitioner Surendrapal Singh Verma is correct whereby negativing the claim of the petitioner Surendra Pal Singh regarding the seniority over Shri P.N. Midha in the cadre of Prosecuting Inspector Grade If, as well as in the cadre of Prosecuting Inspector, Grade -I; (2) that the Prosecuting Inspectors in the Railway Protection Force are eligible for selection to all the posts of Assistant Security Officer in the Railway Protection Force and the petitioner Surendrapal Singh was eligible for being considered for appointment to the post of Assistant Security Officer at the time when appointments were made on that post on February 3, 1976 and the Union of India; the Railway Board, New Delhi; the Inspector General, Railway Protection Force, Railway Board, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi, the General Manager, Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi, and the Chief Security Officer, Northern Railway Baroda House, New Delhi, were directed to make appointment on the post of Assistant Security Officer after taking into consideration the merits and suitability of the petitioner on the basis that the petitioner was eligible for appointment to that post on February 3, 1976.
(2.) D .B. Civil Special Appeal No. 29/77, Surendrapal Singh v. Union of India has been filed by the petitioner appellant by which his claim of seniority over Shri P.N. Midha was negatived. D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 28/79 has been filed by Union of India against the aforesaid finding given in favour of the petitioner Surendrapal Singh and direction given to the non -petitioners. As the points involved in both the appeals are common and they arise out of the common judgment they were heard together and we consider it convenient to dispose them of by a common order.
(3.) APPELLANT Surendrapal Singh in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 29/79 will be referred to as the petitioner and the respondents Nos. 1 to 5 in this appeal will be referred to as non -petitioners No. 1 to 5 and P.N. Midha will be referred as non -petitioner No. 6 as in D.B. Special Appeal No. 29/79, he has been arrayed as respondent No. 6 and in D.B. Civil Special Appeal No. 28/79, he has been joined as respondent No. 2.;