VYAS, J. - (1.) IN these petitions petitioners are seeking directions to respondents for assigning correct seniority position above respondent Nos. 4 to 8 by counting their seniority from the date of their initial appointment i. e. 8. 2. 1980 and 5. 2. 1980, respectively with all consequential benefits by quashing notice Annex. 5 and circular dated 16. 4. 1985. Further it is prayed that promotion order qua respondents Nos. 4 & 5 and petitioners may be promoted to the post of Manager, Grade-D from 23. 3. 2005 with all consequential benefits.
(2.) SINCE controversy involved in these two cases is similar so also the prayer made in both the cases is also same, therefore, facts of writ petition No. 2448/2005 are taken into consideration for adjudicating these matters. The petitioner was initially appointed on the post of LDC in the respondent bank vide Annex. 1 passed by Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Pali Division, Pali dated 4. 2. 1980 under Antodaya Credit Project. This appointment was purely on temporary basis under Antodaya Credit Project and while issuing order Annex. 1 petitioner was posted in the office of respondent No. 3. After abolition of Antodaya Credit Project, petitioner was ordered to be absorbed in the Jalore Central cooperative Bank Ltd. vide order dated 22. 5. 1984 and according to petitioner his services were confirmed in the cadre of LDC by the bank subsequently. The petitioner is claiming seniority w. e. f. the date of his initial entry into service in the project i. e. 8. 2. 1980 on the ground that his seniority was finalised by the respondent bank vide Annex. 4 dated 22. 8. 1994 in which name of petitioner has been shown at serial No. 21 and in that order his date of appointment was also shown as 8. 2. 1980 and subsequently the same date of appointment was shown in the seniority list dated 1. 1. 2004 but also of sudden on 24. 2. 2005 a notice was given to the petitioner for hearing and for correction of his seniority as per notification dated 16. 4. 1985. Petitioner filed his reply to the notice given to him. Vide Annex. 8 dated 21. 3. 2005 final seniority list was issued in which name of petitioner was shown at serial No. 10 and his date of appointment was shown as 1. 4. 1983 the date on which petitioner was absorbed in the bank.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that petitioner's seniority was finalised by the bank itself while reckoning his seniority from his initial date of appointment in the Project but subsequently after about 15 years it is changed and petitioner has been given benefit of seniority w. e. f. 1. 4. 1993, the date on which order was passed by the State Government for absorbing the petitioner in the bank. According to the petitioner, he was rightly placed in the seniority list dated 22. 8. 1994 and subsequently in the seniority list date 1. 1. 2004, therefore, correction in seniority list dated 21. 3. 2005 is illegal and in contravention of settled principle of law and respondents are under obligation to reckon the seniority of petitioner w. e. f his initial entry into the service which is dated 4. 2. 1980. According to petitioner seniority once fixed cannot be changed by subsequent order, therefore, action of respondents is illegal and petitioner is entitled for seniority w. e. f. his initial date of appointment i. e. 4. 2. 1980. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that so called notification issued by the Government for the purpose of regulating the service condition of petitioner dated 16. 4. 1985 is also illegal and it was not with him at the time of filing writ petition but the same has been filed by the respondents as Annex. R/3/1. By this notification it is ordered that seniority of those employees who were appointed in Antodaya Project shall be reckoned from the date of order of absorption in the bank which is 1. 4. 1983. As per petitioner, said circular/notification issued by the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Rajasthan is illegal because by this circular respondents have snatched the right of seniority with effect from initial date of entry into the service of petitioner, therefore, such circular deserves to be quashed. Per contra, counsel for the respondent Bank submitted that respondent bank is required to follow the circular dated 16. 4. 1985 issued by the Government because petitioner was initially appointed by the State Government in a particular project known as Antodaya Project on temporary basis and after abolition of said project a decision was taken by the Government not to throw those employees out of job, therefore, as per decision taken at the State Level to absorb employees like petitioner on the post of LDC in respective cooperative banks and in pursuance of order passed by the State Government on 11. 3. 1983 petitioner was absorbed in the bank vide order Annex. 3 dated 22. 5. 1984 and petitioner was wrongly granted seniority w. e. f his initial entry into the service, therefore, when this mistake came to the knowledge of respondent Bank then notice was issued to petitioner for making correction in the seniority list and to provide seniority according to circular dated 16. 5. 1985. The said notice was given to petitioner on 24. 2. 2005, thereafter, reply was filed by the petitioner, which is Annex. 7 and after considering the said reply, petitioner was assigned proper seniority w. e. f. 1. 4. 1983, the date which is prescribed by the Government for granting seniority vide Annex R/3/1. ;