ORDER
K. Ramamoorthy, J.
1. In CAP. 931/98, the petitioners have prayed for the following
reliefs:-
“In the circumstances mentioned above, it is most humbly and respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to:-
a) Issue appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ, direction or order setting aside the Notification/Fax message No. HPDO1/C-1201 dated 2nd February, 1998 or other notiications of similar nature which are likely to be issued in near future, whereby the respondents have deprived or are likely to deprive the petitioners of their right to be considered for promotion on the post of Manager (Commercial) from the post of Deputy Manager (Commercial) as the same are illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and is violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the
Constitution of India;
b) Issue appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order commanding the respondents to consider the petitioners for their promotion on the post of Manager (Commercial) from the post of Deputy Manager (Commercial) against the vacancies which are in existence or which are likely to occur in near future in Indian Airlines along with other eligible candidates;
c) Issue an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, direction or order commanding the respondents to give all the benefits to the petitioners for the purpose of seniority, promotion, foreign posting, etc. in Vayudoot as well as in Indian Airlines after the merger.”
2. In CWP.723-98, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:-
“In the circumstances mentioned above, it is most humbly and respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to:-
a) Issue appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ, direction or order quashing the Notification/Fax message No.HPDO1/C-1201 dated 2nd February, 1998 or other notifications of similar nature which are likely to be issued in near future, whereby the respondents have deprived or are likely to deprive the petitioners of their right to be considered for promotion on the post of Manager (Commercial) from the post of Deputy Manager (Commercial) as the same are illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and is violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the
Constitution of India;
b) Issue appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order commanding the respondents to consider the petitioners for their promotion on the post of Manager (Commercial) from the post of Deputy Manager (Commercial) against the vacancies which are in existence or which are likely to occur in near future in Indian Airlines along with other eligible candidates;
c) Issue an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, direction or order commanding the respondents to give all the benefits to the petitioners for the purpose of seniority, promotion, foreign posting, etc. of the services rendered by them in Vayudoot.”
3. The main grievance of the petitioners is that they were all working in Vayudoot Limited and the Vayudoot was taken over by Indian Airlines and the petitioners in CWP. 931/98 and petitioners 2 to 4 in CW. 723/98 are working as Deputy Managers (Commercial) in the ‘Short Haul Operations Department, Indian Airlines, whereas the Indian Airlines had invited only the Deputy Managers (Commercial) working in Indian Airlines for the purpose of considering them for promotion to the post of Manager (Commercial). According to the petitioners, they should also have been invited to appear for interview as they are, in law, doing the same work as that of Deputy Managers (Commercial) in Indian Airlines, and the discrimination made by the Indian Airlines is invidious.
4. Before I notice the rival contentions of the parties, a few facts have to be narrated for providing a backdrop, as it were.
5. In the year 1981, Vayudoot Limited, in which the petitioners were working, was incorporated as a private limited company. In 1983, it was converted into a public limited company. On the 25th of May, 1993, the Government of India wrote to the Indian Airlines, Air India, Vayudoot Limited, International Airports Authority of India, the National Airports Authority of India proposing for reorganisation of Vayudoot Limited. The letter reads as under:-
“I am directed to say that a proposal for reorganisation of Vayudoot had been under consideration of Government for some time. It has now been decided as under :
(i) Vayudoot should be merged with Indian Airlines instead of retaining the present form of joint ownership by Indian Airlines and Air India.
(ii) The dues owed by Vayudoot to creditors in the public sector, such as banks, other public enterprises and Central Government on the date of takeover by Indian Airlines would remain frozen for ive years. There will thus be a moratorium for five years on repayment and servicing of the dues; thereafter the liabilities will be discharged by Indian Airlines in 10 annual instalments. In case of a delay in payment of any instalment, interest at the bank rate prevailing at that time, would be payable on the defaulted amount.
2. Government have further decided that pending completion of legal formalities for merger of Vayudoot with Indian Airlines, the following measures need to be taken:
(i) Equity shares of Vayudoot Limited held by Air India will be transferred in favour of Indian Airlines on a token consideration.
(ii) Vayudoot will be retained as a clearly identifiable separate Division of Indian Airlines.”
6. On the 22nd of November, 1993, a notification was issued by the Ministry of Civil Aviation & Tourism in the following terms:-
“I am directed to refer to the minutes of the meeting taken by the Minister for Civil Aviation & Tourism on 8th October, 1993 to review the functioning of all organisations under the Department of Civil Aviation. In the meeting it was decided that AI, IA, NAA, PHHL, IGRUA and HCI will absorb, on an over-riding priority, the surplus staff of Vayudoot against their vacancies set aside for direct recruitment including the posts for reserved categories.
2. You are, therefore, requested to inform Vayudoot of the vacancies that are available in your organisation against the sanc tioned strength within a week, under intimation to this Ministry. Vayudoot will then circulate the names of the employees to the concerned organisations.”
7. On the 24th of May, 1994, the Ministry of Civil Aviation & Tourism issued the following order relating to the process of absorption of Vayudoot employees in various organisation. The same reads as under :-
“Government have decided that the process of absorption of Vayudoot employees organisations under the Ministry of Civil Aviation should begin by 30th June, 1994 positively. As a special case, it has been decided to give the following relaxation/benefits to the Vayudoot employees on joining the new organisation:-
(1) Protection of basic pay.
(2) Probation period and medical examination will be waived.
(3) Appointment will be subject to three years’ satisfactory
record of service.
(4) Leave balance of the employees will be transferred to the new organisation.
(5) Service rendered in Vayudoot will be reckoned for the purpose of Gratuity, Provident Fund, loans and advances, medical facilities and SOL passages.”
8. On the same date, the 24th of May, 1994, the Ministry of Civil Aviation & Tourism also issued an order constituting a Committee to over-see the absorption process of Vayudoot employees. The order reads as under :-
“It has been decided to constitute a Committee to over-see the absorption process of Vayudoot employees. The Committee will consist of the following.
1. Sh. Prashant Mehta, Director,
Ministry of Civil Aviation
2. Sh. S.C. Rastogi, Director (Persl.)
Indian Airlines.
3. Sh. P.C.K. Ravindran, Ex. Director,
(P&A) N.A.A.
4. Sh. J.J. Rindani, Director(HRD),
Air India, Bombay.
5. Sh. N.V. Sridhar, Ex. Director,
(Personnel) IAAI.
6. Sh. S.D. Arora, Ex. Director,
Vayudoot.
7. Sh. S.N.A. Jaffery, Chief Manager
(Corporate Affairs), Vayudoot,-
Convenor.
8. Cap. A.N. Azami, Officiating R.M.,
Vayudoot.
9. Sh. S.P. Shukla, Sr. Traffic Asstt.
Vayudoot.
The Committee will ensure the implementation of conditions of absorption as stipulated in this Ministry’s Order No. Av. 18030/28/91-ACVL(Pt) (i), dated 24th May, 1994.”
9. On the same date, the 24th of May, 1994, the Vayudoot Limited issued a circular with reference to creation of a separate department in the Indian Airlines called the ‘Short Haul Operations Department’. The same reads as
under:-
“It has been decided to create a separate Department in Indian Airlines, called the `Short Haul Operations Department’, for the proposed absorption. Vayudoot employees, in accordance with the guidelines of the Department of Civil Aviation. The main criteria for the absorption is as follows :-
(1) Employees so absorbed in this Department will be given Indian Airlines’ Pay scales and other benefits being enjoyed by Indian Airlines employees.
(2) There will be no inter-Departmental transfer between the Department mentioned above and other Departments in Indian Air-ines.
(3) Indian Airlines Recruitment & Promotion Rules as well as Service Conditions/other Rules will apply to employees of the newly created Department.
(4) On absorption of employees of Vayudoot in the aforesaid Department, the Basic Pay drawn by the employees will be fitted at an appropriate stage of Basic Pay applicable to the comparable scale of pay of Indian Airlines.
(5) For those employees who presently possess a particular designation but do not have the requisite length of service for such a post, in accordance with Indian Airlines’ Rules, the following procedure will be followed:-
i) Basic Pay will be protected.
ii) The persons concerned will be given the designation commensurate with his/her length of service and that designation will remain till he/she puts in the length of service required in accordance with the Rules of Indian Airlines.
Any problem that may arise after the absorption of Vayudoot employees into the ‘Short Haul Operations Department’ of Indian Airlines, shall be referred to a Committee consisting of:-
i) Sh. S.D. Arora,
Ex.Director, Vayudoot Ltd.
ii) Sh. S.N.A. Jaffery,
Chief Manager(Corporate Affairs)
Vayudoot Ltd.
iii) Sh. Sekhar Ghose,
Sr. Dy. Industrial Relation Manager
Indian Airlines,
Sh.S.N.A.Jaffery will be the Convener of the Committee.
This issues with the concurrence of the Managing Director.”
10. On the 29th of November, 1994, the fourth petitioner in CWP. 931/98 was issued with an order of appointment on absorption. It is only just to show how the Indian Airlines issued orders of appointment. The same is extracted below:
“In accordance with circular No. PF/HQ/PERS dated 24th May’, 94 issued by the Executive Director, Vayudoot Limited, we are pleased to appoint you on absorption as DEPUTY MANAGER COMMERCIAL in the Short Haul Operations Department of Indian Airlines Limited with effect from 1.12.1994 on the terms and conditions speci fied below :-
1. You will get a starting basic pay of Rs. 2585/- per mensem in the pay scale of Rs. 2225-60-2825-70-3035-120-3755 plus the usual allowances admissible to the employees, from time to time.
2. During the tenure of your service in the Short Haul Operations Department, Indian Airlines Limited, you will be governed by the applicable Service Regulations and Standing Orders as framed/amended by Indian Airlines Limited from time to time.
3. You will be initially posted at HEAD QUARTERS. During the tenure of your service, you are liable to be transferred to any Station where Short Haul Operations Department of Indian Airlines Limited operates or may operate hereafter. You will not be transferred to any other Department of Indian Airlines Limited. Howev er, your services may be utilised in other Departments for a limited period as required due to exigencies of work.
4. Your seniority will be maintained separately in the Short Haul Operations Department of Indian Airlines Limited and the same will be determined as per existing rules.
5. Leave standing to your credit in Vayudoot Limited will be transferred to the Short Haul Operations Department of Indian Airlines Limited. Your service in Vayudoot Limited will be reckoned for the purpose of Gratuity, Provident Fund, Loans and Advances, Medical Facilities and SOL passages.
6. In case you belong to SC/ST/OBC, you are required to produce a certificate in support of the same, issued by the competent authority in the format prescribed by the Government of India together with its attested copies. If, at any stage, the caste/tribe/class certificate submitted by you is found to be false, appropriate action will be taken against you.
7. In case you belong to SC community, any change in your religion at any stage should be immediately intimated to your Departmental Head.
8. Your services with Vayudoot Limited will stand terminated from the date of your absorption in Indian Airlines Limited.
9. If the offer of appointment on the above terms and conditions is acceptable to you, please return to us the attached duplicate copy of this letter, duly signed, in token of your acceptance of this offer latest by 30th November, 1994. Please send your joining report in token of your having reported for duty in the Short Haul Operations Department on or after 1.12.1994 through your Regional Heads/Departmental Heads.”
11. There are various dates on which letters of appointment were issued and it is not necessary to extract all of them. On the 7th of December, 1994, the Indian Airlines issued the letter mentioning functioning of Short Haul Operations Department in Indian Airlines. The same is as under:-
“The Short Haul Operations Department has been set up as a distinct and separate Profit Centre and has become functional w.e.f.1st of December, 1994.
Since this Department is to function as a separate Profit Centre, it will have its own Budget, Balance Sheets and Profit & Loss Accounts, which will be finally merged with the Corporate system. The accounting systems will be finalised by the Director Finance and the Executive Director, Short Haul Operations Department.
This Department will have a variety of sub-disciplines such as Engineering, Operations, Commercial, Personnel & Administration, Finance, Stores, EDP, and Vigilance. It will have its own Delegation of Financial and Administrative Powers which are being worked out separately and, meanwhile, the Executive Director (Short Haul) will exercise the Financial and Administrative Powers, available to Group I Directors at headquarters.
However, for the following disciplines, the respective Departments of India Airlines will cater to the requirements of a Short Haul Operations Department:-
(i) Planning
(ii) Civil Engineering
(iii) Security
(iv) Internal Audit
(v) Medical for Staff including CFMS/REMS
(vi) Public Relations
(vii) Flight Safety
(viii) Stores (Except local purchase)
Employees of the Short Haul Operations Department will be eligible for various facilities as are available to the employees of Indian Airlines, e.g. canteen, air passages, uniforms, loans, advances, staff coach facility etc.
All the Departmental Heads at HQrs. and Directors in the Regions are requested to extend all cooperation to ensure smooth funcioning of the Short Haul Operations Department.”
12. The petitioners in CWP. 931/98 and petitioners in CW. 723/98 have been orking in ‘Short Haul Operations Department in Indian Airlines and they have been receiving the pay and allowances as per the terms of orders of appointment on absorption. As I had mentioned above, the petitioners are claiming parity with the Deputy Managers (Commercial) working in Indian Airlines. In the writ petitions, the petitioners have attempted to project their case in their own way. In CWP. 931/98, the petitioners have referred to the various proceedings issued by the Government of India, the Indian
Airlines and the Vayudoot Limited, and have stated that in ‘Short Haul Operations Department, there are no activities at all. The petitioners and persons similarly situated like the petitioners have been directed to work in Indian Airlines in different departments under new terms and conditions known as ‘secondment’.
13. It is stated by the petitioners in paragraph 11 of the writ petition in CWP. 931/98:
“It is submitted in the circumstances mentioned above though admittedly Vayudoot has been merged in Indian ines all the properties belonging to Vayudoot including aircraft, all assets and liabilities including machinery, land space at Airports along with shares which Vayudoot was having earlier to its merger have been transferred in favour of Indian Airlines. The employees of Vayudoot have also been absorbed in Indian Airlines. The peti tioners on a term known as “secondment” have also been directed to work in various Departments of Indian Airlines. The Short Haul perations Department which was created at the time of the merger of Vayudoot in Indian Airlines is not carrying any commercial
activities. The petitioners are thus working in various depart ments of Indian Airlines since 1994 onwards and they have already completed about four years of service even in Indian Airlines and their services have been directed to be governed by regulation and standing orders as framed/amended from time to time by Indian Airlines Limited. However, merely to deprive the petitioners of their right to get further promotions as has been given to the employees similar situated in different Departments of Indian Airlines, the respondents illegally and arbitrarily created a new epartment known as Short Haul Operations Department (S.H.O.D.) though admittedly, this Department is carrying no commercial or
any other type of activity and all the employeeshave been directed under the term “secondment” in other Departments of Indian Airlines. The net result is that though the petitioners have been working in different Departments of Indian Airlines since a period of about 3 to 4 years on the post of Deputy Manager (Commercial) and they have also worked for a considerable period of 5 to 7 years in Vayudoot also, however, they have been denied of their right to be considered for promotion on the post of Manager(Commercial). Some persons junior to the petitioners who were promoted on the post of Deputy Manager two to three years back have been directed to be considered for the post of Manager (Commercial) against the existing vacancies. The petitioners cannot be denied of their right to be considered for motion to the post of Manager (Commercial) merely because a new Department known as S.H.O.D. has been created by the respondent, although, the petitioners have been discharging their duties in different Departments in Indian Airlines under the terms “second- ment”. The said Department known as Short Haul Operations Department has been created merely to deprive the petitioners of their right to have further promotion like their colleagues in other Departments of Indian Airlines, though this Department is not carrying commercial or any other type of activities and it is almost a nonest Department. The only function of this Department is to issue salary cheques to the petitioners and other persons who have been absorbed in Indian Airlines after the merger of Vayudoot in Indian Airlines.”
14. It is stated by the petitioners in paragraph 12 of the writ petition n CWP. 931/98:
“It is submitted that by creating a new Department known as Short Haul Operations Department the respondents have caused stagnation in the service prospects of the petitioners inasmuch as that since this Department is not carrying any activities there is no likelihood of any progress promotion in service career of the
petitioners.”
15. It is stated by the petitioners in paragraph 15 of the writ petition n CWP.931/98:
“It is submitted that even if it is assumed that the service rendered by the petitioners in Vayudoot is not likely to be reckoned for the purpose for the purpose of further promotion and career progression the petitioners are entitled to be considered for their promotion on the post of Manager (Commercial) on the basis of service rendered by them in different Department of Indian Airlines since the date of their absorption in Indian Airlines.”
16. About the calling for applications for interview for the post of anager (Commercial), it is stated by the petitioners in paragraph 17 of the writ petition in CWP. 931/98:
“It is submitted that in fact the purpose of the respondents for conducting interview for promotion on the post of Manager (Com- mercial) from the post of Deputy Manager (Commercial) is only to prepare select panel likely to be operated for a further period of one year to fill up all the existing as well as the vacancies which are likely to occur in future. Thus, if the petitioners hereinabove are allowed to be ignored, the petitioners are likely
to be denied promotion on the post of Manager (Commercial) for another 10 years as there is no likelihood that in another one decade some more vacancies for the post of Manager (Commercial) will occur. Thus the petitioners would be denied their right to be considered for promotion on the post of Manager (Commercial) for another 10 years in case they are allowed to be ignored this time.”
17. It is stated by the petitioners in paragraph D of the grounds in the CWP. 931/98:
“Because at the time of merger of Vayudoot in Indian Airlines the Government of India, Ministry of Civil Aviation has given solemn undertaking and assurance through various letters as well as absorption letters issued to the petitioners that the services rendered by them in Vayudoot shall be reckoned for all purposes including for the purpose of their further promotion in higher scales or grade. However, at present the respondents are going back from their assurance given to the petitioners. The respondents are bound by promissory estoppel. Once the assurance has been given by the respondents, the respondents cannot be allowed to back out from the undertaking/assurance.”
18. Referring to the discrimination aspect, it is stated by the petition-
ers in paragraph E of the grounds in the CWP. 931/98:
“Because the petitioners are entitled to carry on their services rendered by them in Vayudoot with them in Indian Airlines a Vayudoot as a whole including its employees has been merged in Indian Airlines. Neither the petitioners can be denied of their right to be considered for promotion in higher grade nor they can be denied of their right to get the benefit of the services rendered by them in Vayudoot.”
19. The petitioners would also state that at the time of merger of Vayuot Limited with the Indian Airlines, the Ministry of Civil Aviation, Government of India, had given a solemn undertaking and assurance that the service rendered by the petitioners and other similarly situated persons like the petitioners would be reckoned for all purposes, including consideration for promotion to higher scales and grades. The petitioners would assert that the services rendered by them in Vayudoot Limited cannot be ignored. The petitioners would submit that the petitioners being fullfledged employees of Indian Airlines, cannot be treated, for the purpose of promotion, as if they are the employees of Vayudoot Limited.
20. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents 2 to 5, referring to the various proceedings which had already been adverted to by me, it is stated:
“Instructions of the Ministry of Civil Aviation, the circular of Vayudoot and the offer of absorption from the Short Haul Operations Department clearly provided for the following:-
i) Vayudoot would be retained as a clearly identifiable separate division of Indian Airlines called the ‘Short Haul Operations Department’.
ii) The services rendered in Vayudoot would be reckoned only for the purpose of Gratuity, Provident Fund, Loans and Advances, Medical Facilities and SOL passages. Protection of basic pay and transfer of leave balance was also provided.
iii) The seniority of Vayudoot employees absorbed in the SHOD of Indian Airlines was to be maintained separately in the SHOD.
iv) Absorbed employees were not to be transferred to any Department of Indian Airlines Limited and they were required to work in any station where the SHOD was to operate. However, Indian Airlines could utilise their services in other Departments for a limited period due to exigencies of work.”
21. It is stated in the counter-affidavit:
“The offer of appointment clearly stipulated the maintenance of eparate seniority distinct from the mainstream employees.”
22. It is further stated in the counter:
“The Employees of Vayudoot Limited who were absorped/appointed in the Indian Airlines have been given the benefit of Indian Airlines pay scales and all benefits provided for in Government instructions issued on the 24th of May, 1994”.
23. It is stated in the counter :
“I say that the issue of merger of seniority of employees in SHOD and Indian Airlines has been raised from time to time and has been a subject matter of discussions. The Secretary, Civil Aviaion, Government of India has held meetings with representatives of the Manager of Indian Airlines, representatives of SHOD on 10th March, 1998 and thereafter on 23rd April, 1998. The Ministry had attempted to seek solutions for permanent absorption of SHOD employees in the mainstream of Indian Airlines by taking one category of employees at a time. In respect of pilots, a decision
has been taken that the SHOD line pilots will undergo training on Indian Airlines fleet and on getting the type endorsement, they will be placed at the bottom of the seniority of First Officers (Co-pilots). However, their past services will be counted for pay protection.”
24. With reference to Aircraft Engineers, it is stated in the Counter:
“In respect of Aircraft Engineers, a decision has been taken that Aircraft Engineers of SHOD will undergo training on any of the Indian Airlines jet fleet as per requirement and after acquiring licence endorsement will be placed at the bottom of the seniority of Aircraft Engineer’s grade in the respective trades.”
25. It is further stated in the counter :
“In respect of general category staff, it has been decided that the general category staff of SHOD will be placed at the bottom of each grade in the respective Departments as on 10th March, 1998. Future promotion of such employees will be as per Indian Airlines Rules/Regulations. A notification has also been issued to this effect vide reference No. HPD01/SHOD dated 21.4.1998, a copy of which is annexed hereto as Annexure-H. In respect of Aircraft Technicians and general category officers, solution has not yet been arrived at. It is, therefore, clear that action is already in hand by the Ministry of Civil Aviation to absorb various categories of SHOD employees in the mainstream of Indian
Airlines. Since more than 95% of the employees of Indian Airlines are represented by various recognised Unions/Associations, and majority of them are of `workmen’ category as defined under the Industrial Disputes Act, it is imperative that the absorption process should involve a process of consensus building between SHOD employees and the recognised Unions/Associations of Indian Airlines. Indian Airlines Officers’ Association which is the representative body of the general category officers in Indian Airlines has expressed its view that SHOD Officers should meet the eligibility criteria for appointment in Indian Airlines. The Indian Airlines Officer’s Association has also demanded that HOD Officers should be inducted only at the entry level, and not through lateral entry at each grade. However, no decision has been arrived at till date by the Ministry.”
26. About the Criteria for recruitment, it is stated:
“It is submitted that Indian Airlines has a well defined recruitment policy with eligibility criteria for different direct entry levels and also for promotions to various levels. In respect of Vayudoot Limited, to the best of our knowledge, no such detailed rules and regulations were in vogue. Many of the Officers of Vayudoot Limited who were absorbed in the Short Haul Operations Department of Indian Airlines do not possess the minimum laid down criteria as per applicable for appointment in Indian Airlines.”
27. The Indian Airlines made its position clear by stating:
“The petitioners, who are employees of Vayudoot cannot claim equality with employees of Indian Airlines. It is to be noted that in respect of employees of Vayudoot who have been appointed in Air India have been appointed only at direct entry levels and have taken the seniority at the bottom of the cadres to which they have been appointed. In respect of Line Pilots and Aircraft Engineers, as already stated at para 7, they would be placed at the bottom of the seniority of their cadres. In respect of general category of employees, they are to be placed at the bottom of
each grade in the respective Department as on 10th March, 1998. It can, therefore, be seen that in a number of categories, they have already accepted seniority at the bottom of the cadre in Indian Airlines. The employees of Vayudoot are not comparable with the employees of Indian Airlines and their absorption has been in a distinct, separate Department and thus cannot allege any discrimination. The petitioners who were employees of Vayudoot have been absorbed in Short Haul Operations Department which is a separate entity and therefore, cannot compare their case
with employees of Indian Airlines. It is submitted that the petition is, therefore, being rendered infructuous as unequals cannot be compared, muchless, as a matter of right.”
28. In the counter, reference is also made to the representation made by the Indian Airlines Officers Association. A point is also taken that the Indian Airlines Officers Association is a necessary party to the writ petition.
29. From the counter, the stand of the respondents 2 to 5 is clear that while making merger the respondents 2 to 5 had taken into account all aspects of the matter and considered all relevant aspects and the decision had been taken and the same is in accordance with settled principles of natural justice. According to the respondents 2 to 5, the petitioners have not made out any case for interference.
30. The Indian Airlines Officers Association has filed a CM. 7849/98 to implead itself as a party. In paragraph 5 of the CM it is stated:
“It may be appropriate to point out that the staff of the Vayudoot taken for absorption in Air India has been put at the tail end of the cadre to which the particular staff belonged. This is in accordance with the well established principles of Service Jurisprudence which lay down that any person who comes as a result of take-over of some sick industry or department is to be treated as fresh entrant placing him at the tail end of the persons borne on the strength of the cadre. The principle has been so affirmed in various decisions by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and various High Courts including in the case of Gurmail Singh & Others Vs. State of Punjab & Others decided on 25.10.1990.
The applicant-association thus seeks to implead itself as a party respondent to safeguard the interests of its members in the aforesaid proceedings. The application deserves to be allowed in the interest of justice and for the reasons stated hereinabove.”
31. The applicant/Association filed the communication dated 25.5.93, nistry of Civil Aviation, Government of India, as Annexure-A/1 to the pplicatioin, which is already extracted. The circular issued by the Vayudoot Limited dated 24.5.1994 is filed by the applicant as Annexure-A/2. The communication from the Managing Director, Indian Airlines dated 17.12.1984 is filed by the applicant as Annexure-P/3. The communication dated 4.1.1995 from the General Manager, Indian Airlines to the General Secretary of the Indian Airlines Officers Association is filed as Annexure-A/4. The communi-cation dated 29.11.94, which relates to appointment/absorption in Short Haul Operations Department is filed as Annexure-P/5. The Indian Airlines Officers Association has placed on record the details of 18 officers. Their qualifications and their present position are as under:-
Sl. Name Date of Designation Promotions Vayudoot Qualifi-
No. Joining held at the in design- Present cations
in time of ation in
Vayudoot joining Airlines
Indian
Airlines
1. Mr.Charu 14.11.86 Steno 1. 1.05.88 - Secretary Dy.Mana- Higher
C.Joshi 2. 1.10.89 - Private ger(OA) Secondary
Secretary
2. Ms.S. 02.03.83 Assistant 1.1.10.84-Secretary Dy.Mana- B.A.
Shanti Steno 2. 1.01.87 - Sr. ger(OA)
Secretary
3. 18.9.87 - Private
Secretary
4. 1.10.89 - Ex.Secretary
3. Mr.Kalyan 9.8.83 Driver 1.1.4.85-Sr.Driver Dy.Mana- Matric
Singh 2. 1.08.86 - Supdt. ger(Trpt.)
(Trpt.)
3. 1.04.90 - Transport
Officer
4. Mr.G.S. 25.7.83 Sr.Office 1.1.10.84-Supdt. Dy.Manager B.Sc.,
Johar Asstt. 2. 1.06.85 - Admn. LLB
Officer(P)
3. 1.09.86 - Admn.Officer
Sr.Grade
4. 1.12.88 - Asstt.Manager
5.Ms.Susan 1.6.87 Steno 1.1.5.88-Secretary Dy.Mana- B.Com,
Johan 2. 1.10.89-Private ger(OA) Diploma
Secretary Secretarial
Practice
6. Ms.Maria 29.12.86 Secretary 1. 1.5.90-Private Dy.Mana- S.Sc.
Dias Secretary ger (OA) (Tele/
Tourism/
Steno Courses)
7. Mr.S. 1.8.84 Daftry 1.1.8.84-Office Asstt. Dy.Mana- B.Com
Chander (Promoted ger(Admn)
Das same day)
2. 1.10.84 - Sr.Office Asstt.
3. 1.01.87 - Supdt.
4. 1.10.89 - Corporate
Officer
8. Mr.Cicil 1.9.85 Airport 1. 1.3.86 - Dy.Manager Camb-
Jackson Manager Sr. Manager ridge
9. Mr.Kamal 1.10.84 Sr.Traffic 1.1.6.86-Supdt. Dy.Manager B.Com.
jeet Singh Asstt. 2.1.5.88-Traffic Officer
10.Ms.Renu 1.10.85 Traffic 1. 1.6.86 - Supdt. Dy.Manager B.A.
Golan Asstt. 2. 1.05.88 - Comml.Officer
11. Mr.R.K. 1.3.83 Sr.Office 1. 1.8.83-Flight Dy. B.Com.
Agarwal Asstt. Steward Manager
2. 1.6.86-Operation
Officer
3. 1.12.88 - Asstt.
Manager
12. Mr.A.P. 15.11.84 Stores 1.1.5.88-Office Supdt. Dy.Manager S.S.L.C.
B.Nair & Purchase Assistant
13. Mr.A.K. 20.07.83 Sr.Traffic 1.1.10.84-Supdt. Dy.Manager B.Com.
Gupta Asstt. 2.1.5.88-Officer (Finance)
14. Mr.K.P. 1.8.84 Sr.Accts. 1.1.9.86-Supdt Dy.Manager B.Com.
Agarwal Asstt. 2.1.5.88-Officer (Finance)
15. Mr.P.H. 02.05.85 Sr.Accts. 1. 11.5.86-Supdt. Dy.Manager M.Com.
Lele Asstt. 2. 1.03.88-Sr.Supdt. (Finance)
3. 1.03.89 - Accts.
Officer
16. Mr.R.K. 1.11.84 Sr.Accts. 1. 1.1.87-Supdt. Dy.Manager B.Com.
Sikka Asstt. 2. 1.07.89 - Accts. (Finance)
Officer
17. Mr.R.D. 2.3.83 Office 1. 1.4.84-Sr.Accts. Dy.Manager High
Singh Asstt. Asstt. (Finance) School
2. 1.03.87 - Supdt.
3. 1.07.89 - Accts.
Officer
18. Mr.Dig- 1.8.84 Sr.Accts. 1. 1.01.87-Supdt Asstt. B.Com.
vijay 2. 1.07.89 - Accts. Manager
Rana Officer
32. In the light of the factual position, the learned senior counsel for the petitioners, Mr. M.N. Krishnamani, submitted that:
1. In all merger cases and in all cases where the services were absorbed, the length of service of employees of both the services have to be taken into account to frame a common seniority, and ccording to the learned senior counsel, Mr. M.N. Krishnamani, this proposition is well settled;
2. even in transfer cases and deputation-cum-absorption cases, he service rendered in parent department or lending department is not excluded for reckoning a seniority;
3. Only in cases where transfer of an employee is stayed on his request, he will lose his past service.
33. The Supreme Court had laid down that if pay protection is given, that ould give a clear indication that there has been a complete amalgamation and the employees taken into the service would have the benefit of the service rendered in the erstwhile organisation which is merged with the main organisation. The petitioners consequent on the merger, are working as regular officers in the Indian Airlines and to deny them the benefit of such regular service would come within the mischief of Articles 14 and 16
of the Constitution of India. Meeting the submission of counsel for the Indian Airlines Officers Association that one person who joined as driver, became Deputy Manager (Commercial), it was submitted that in the Indian
Airlines illiterates had become Deputy Chief Engineers and General Mangers, e.g., one Mr. N.K. Sharma, illiterate became Deputy Chief Aircraft Engineer and one Mr. Dayal became Chief Manager (Engg). It was also submitted that creation of Short Haul Operations Department was for the purpose of keeping the petitioners and other similarly situated persons distinct and to deny them equal opportunities in Indian Airlines.
33. Mr. Mukul Rohtagi, the learned senior counsel for Indian Airlines, submitted that the Pilots absorbed by Air India from Vayudoot were placed at bottom of the grade on voluntary transfer principle. Similar was the case with the staff absorbed by Air India. Thus, Managers in Vayudoot were taken as Assistant Managers. He further submitted that the year 1996, just to give a moral boost to the employees who have come from Vayudoot without following any norms, the Assistant Managers were promoted as Deputy Mangers. There are no recruitment rules for the post of Assistant Manager in Vayudoot and everything was done on ad hoc basis. The order of appointment was accepted by each of the employees in the form of an affidavit and the petitioners cannot now resile and seek relief on some principles which are not applicable. Mr. Mukul Rohtagi, the senior counsel for Indian Airlines, relied upon the following judgments:-
1. “Chairman, Canara Bank, Bangalore Vs. M.S. Jasra & Others”,
1992 1 LLJ 777.
2. “Gurmail Singh & Others etc. Vs. State of Punjab & Others”,
1991 2 LLJ 76 (SC).
34. Mr. Ashok Bhasin, the learned counsel for the Union of India, submitted that negotiations were held for the purpose of sorting out the differences. A meeting was held on the 10th of March, 1998 pertaining to the demands of the employees of the Short Haul Operations Department of the Indian Airlines. The minutes of the meeting is as under:-
“A meeting was convened on 10.3.1998 at 2.30 PM by the Secretary (Civil Aviation) to discuss the issues related to the demands of the employees of the Short Haul Operations Department of the Indian Airlines. A list of the participants is given at the Annexure.
In a nutshell, the background of the merger of Vayudoot with Indian Airlines, the absorption of Vayudoot employees into IA and AI and the creation of Short Haul Operations Department is as follows:-
1. The Ministry of Civil Aviation issued necessary directions on 25.5.1993 that Vayudoot be merged with Indian Airlines instead of retaining the joint ownership by Indian Airlines and Air India. It was also directed subsequently that the employees of Vayudoot be absorbed by the organisations under the administrative control of MCA on overriding priority. According, Vayudoot employees were absorbed in IA and AI as under:-
Indian Airlines : 1023 employees Air India : 311 employees
2. In order to absorb such a large number of employees, the Indian Airlines created a Short Haul Operations Department which consisted of Vayudoot employees in their re-grouped order of seniority as per their length of service with designations as were applicable in Indian Airlines. This took care of the opposition from the IA’s unions to the absorption of Vayudoot employees on the one hand and also met with the directions of the Government on the other. However, slowly over a period of time, the SHOD employees started representing on various counts such as the lack of gainful utilisation of their services, maintenance of separate seniority list of the employee of SHOD from that of the
IA’s employees, no avenues of career progression, etc. The various cadres such as the pilots, the engineers, the technicians, the general category staff and officers repeatedly represented nd held discussions with the management of the Indian Airlines. In order to discuss the issues one by one and to settle the same, the Secretary (CA) convened this meeting wherein their demands were taken up in the presence of the CMD, Indian Airlines. Discussions were held at great length and the views of the employees as well as of the IA’s representatives were presented. After prolonged discussions, the following decisions were taken in respect of each category:
PILOT
1. SHOD Pilots will undergo training on IA aircraft and on getting type endorsement will be placed at the bottom of the senior-ity of First Officers (Co-Pilots). However, their past services will be counted for the purpose of pay protection and other financial benefits. Their future growth will be on the basis of the line seniority. The IA will take necessary action to initiate their training within a period of one month.
2. Pilots who fail to obtain licence endorsement as per IA rules will be retained in SHOD. Such Pilots may be provided appropriate ground job. Their basic pay and allowances in such cases will be protected. The proposal is based on the basis of the policy adopted by the Company while phasing out turboprop aircraft in 1982.
3. Four executive Pilots will remain in SHOD and will be sent on deputation to Alliance Air. After acquiring training and getting Boeing endorsement they will be appointed as Co-Pilots. Their pay and allowances and status will be protected.
AIRCRAFT ENGINEERS
1. The Aircraft Engineers will undergo training on any of the IA jet fleet as per requirement and after acquiring licence endorse- ment will be placed at the bottom of the seniority of Aircraft Engineers in the respective grade.
2. The Aircraft Engineers who fail to obtain licence endorsement in three DGCA attempts will be reverted back to SHOD. Such Air- craft Engineers may be provided alternate job. Their basic pay in such cases will be protected.
TECHNICIANS
SHOD Aircraft Technicians were of the view that they should get seniority in the respective grades. It was explained that Indian Aircraft Technicians’ Association was not agreeable to the later- al transfer of technicians in the respective grades. The IATA’s contention was that when IA technicians were transferred from one region to the other, they were losing their seniority. Therefore, SHOD technicians should also be placed at the bottom of the seniority of Aircraft Technicians. This was not acceptable to SHOD technicians. They stated that they will discuss this issue
with their colleagues and report to the Ministry.
GENERAL CATEGORY STAFF
It was decided that the general category staff of the SHOD will be placed at the bottom of each grade in respective Departments as on 10th March, 1998.
GENERAL CATEGORY OFFICERS
It was decided to discuss the issue of the general category officers again since some reservations were expressed during the meeting with regard to induction of the SHOD officers into the respective grades.
SENIORITY
It was decided that SHOD employees should be reckoned in respective seniorities for the general category staff in respective grades of each department from 10th March, 1998. Future promotions should consider such employees as per the revised seniority of the IA.
Inter-se seniority of SHOD employees will be maintained while placing them in different cadres/grades.”
35. On the 2nd of April, 1998, the Government of India issued a modification to the note dated 23.3.1998 which reads as under:-
“Sub: Minutes of the meeting convened by the Secretary (Civil Aviation) on 10.3.1998 at 2.30 p.m. on the issue pertaining to the demands of the SHOD employees of the Indian Airlines.
In partial modification of this Ministry’s note of even number dated 23rd March, 1998 on the subject noted above, the under signed is directed to say that Para ‘1’ and ‘2’ relating to Aircraft Engineers may be substituted as under :-
1. “The Aircraft Engineer will undergo training on any of the IA fleet as per requirement and after acquiring licence endorsement will be placed at the bottom of the seniority of Aircraft Engineers in the respective grade. However, their past service will be counted for the purpose of pay protection and other financial benefits. Their future growth will be on the basis of the line seniority. The Indian Airlines will take necessary action to initiate their training within a period of one month.
2. The Aircraft Engineers who fail to obtain licence endorse ment in three DGCA attempts will be reverted back to SHOD. Such Aircraft Engineers may be provided alternate job. Their status, pay and allowances in such cases will be protected.”
36. On the 23rd of April, 1998 a meeting was held relating to issues and emand of the employees of the Short Haul Operations Department, Indian Airlines. The minutes of the meeting is as under :-
A meeting was convened on 23rd April, 1998 at 3.00 p.m. to discuss the issues relating to the demands of the employees of Short Haul Operation Department (SHOD) of the Indian Airlines. The list of participants is
annexed.
After careful consideration and detailed discussions with the management of the I.A. and the representatives of various categories of employees of Short Haul Operations Department of the Indian Airlines, the following Decisions were taken pertaining to each category:-
TRAINING PILOTS
1. There were four trainee pilots at the time of merger of Vayudoot with Indian Airlines but their training could not be completed due to the merger. It was pointed out in the meeting that these pilots have neither been used for any work nor was their training completed or any compensation given to them. M.D., Alliance Air made an offer to consider these pilots for the post of Flight Operations Assistants. The representatives of the trainee/pilots could not give a decisive reply in the meeting. As such, no final decision could be taken.
GENERAL CATEGORY OFFICERS:
2. The representatives of the general category officers have demanded the issuing of Proforma Promotions for SHOD Officers after their lateral absorption in other Departments of Indian Airlines with effect from 1st December, 1994. However, keeping with the general principle being followed in the other cases of aircraft engineers and general category staff, it was suggested that the general category officers should be placed at the bottom of each grade and in their respective departments as on 10th March, 1998. However, their designation, status, pay and allowances would be protected by Indian Airlines in their respective departments. The representatives of the SHOD Officers could not
reach a conclusive decision on this offer in the meeting.
TECHNICIANS
3. The Technicians have demanded that their seniority be counted from the date of joining in the erstwhile Vayudoot with proper career progression. It was also pointed out by them that Indian Airlines Management gave them an undertaking at the time of merger that the Aircraft Technicians will not be placed at the induction level. In case, their demand was not accepted, they preferred to remain in SHOD, CMD, I.A. desired to take a week’s time to discuss their issue with IAIA so that some perceptible solution could be found in their case as well.
4. It was, however, decided that their position could be disussed again after the receipt of Indian Airlines report in the matter on whether they could be inducted in their respective grade and rank as on 10th March, 1998 with protection of their status, designation and pay and other allowances or allowed to continue in SHOD with career progression.
GENERAL CATEGORY STAFF
5. In the last meeting held on 10th Mach, 1998, it was decided that the general category staff of the SHOD will be placed at the bottom of each grade in their respective Departments as on 10th Mach, 1998. No representative of this category was present in the last meeting, they have now stated that the cut-off date i.e. 10th March, 1998 is not suitable to them as it will result in a long delay in their promotions. They, therefore, desired to continue in SHOD with proper career progression.
6. In view of the above, it was decided that the General category of staff may be offered on voluntary basis to merge with Indian Airlines as on 10th March, 1998 at the existing grade with protection of their pay and past service and other benefits etc. as per I.A. rules.
The meeting ended with a vote of thanks to the Chair.
37. The attendance sheet shows the persons who attended the meeting. The
same is as under:-
ATTENDANCE SHEET
MINISTRY OF CIVIL AVIATION
1. Sh. M.K. Kaw Secretary (CA)
In the Chair
2. Sh. A.P. Singh, Joint Secretary
3. Smt. Vandita Sharma, Dy. Secretary
4. Sh. R.S. Meena, Under Secretary
5. Smt. Rajni Taneja, Section Officer
INDIAN AIRLINES LTD. MANAGEMENT
6. Sh. P.C. Sen, Chairman &
Managing Director
7. Cap. J.R.D. Rao,
Deputy Managing Director
8. Sh. S.D. Arora, Dy. Managing Director
9. Sh. Gurdip Singh, Director (Pers.)
10. Sh. V. Kashyap, Ex. Director (SHOD)
TECHNICIANS
11. Sh. S.K. Singh, M/Technician
12. Sh. Amit J. Sharma, M/Technician
GENERAL CATEGORY OFFICERS
13. Sh. Abhay Pathak, Manager (Comm)
14. Sh. Ashok K. Parmar Manager (Comm)
GENERAL CATEGORY STAFF
15. Sh.Adesh Chaturvedi
(Indian Airlines Employees Cong.)
16. Sh. S.P. Shokia,
Vayudoot Karmchari Sangh
TRAINEE PILOTS
17. Sh. Manoj Kumar Dutta
18. Sh. Manoj Kumar
AIR HOSTESSES
19. Ms. Denna Barua
20. Ms. Divya Vardhan
21. Ms. Aradhana Jain
OTHERS
22. Ms. Sameena Ahmed,
Vayudoot Karmchari Sangh
23. Dr. S.S. Imam, M. Technician
24. Sh. K.S. Mishra, Sr. Technician
25. Sh. S.S. Chandel, Supdt.
26. Sh. S.R. Zaidi, Sr. Store Techn.
27. Sh. Jagjit Singh,
Sr. A/c Technician
28. Sh. Suresh Kumar, Sr. OA
29. Sh. Sanjai Misri, Dy. Manager(C)
30. Sh. Anand Pandey, Dy. Manager(C)
No final decision could be reached.
38. The learned senior counsel for the petitioners, Mr. M.N. Krishnamani, relying upon the following judgments, submitted that in all merger cases the past services of the persons who came into the main organisation have
to be reckoned for interse seniority:
1. “Joginder Nath & Others Vs. Union of India & Others”, 1975 (1) SLR 33.
2. “K. Madhavan & Another Vs. Union of India & Others, .
3. “Kewal Krishan Bagga Vs. The Chairman Railway Board & Oth-
ers”.
39. In “Joginder Nath & Others Vs. Union of India & Others”, 1975 (1) SLR 33, the Supreme Court dealt with the claim of interse seniority of officers who had come to service under the Delhi Administration. I have gone through
the judgment and the ratio laid down therein would not apply to the facts
of the instant case.
40. In “K. Madhavan & Another Vs. Union of India & Others, the facts are entirely different and it is not necessary to deal with
the same. Judgment in “Kewal Krishan Bagga Vs. The Chairman Railway Board &
Others”, also would deal with a different situation.
41. The next proposition put forth by the learned senior counsel for the petitioners, Mr. M.N. Krishnamani, was that even in transfer cases and deputation-cum-abrosption cases, the service rendered in parent department or lending department is not excluded. In support of this, the learned senior counsel for the petitioners, Mr. M.N. Krishnamani, referred to the following judgments:
1. "Dr. S.K. Bhatnagar Vs. Union of India & Others", 1995 (5) SLR 523
2. "Ms. Mohini Rautels Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi",
.
42. In "Dr. S.K. Bhatnagar Vs. Union of India & Others", 1995 (5) SLR 523
(Delhi High Court), the claim of the petitioner before this is considered
by this Court in the following terms:
“Mr. Bhat has argued that the petitioner was selected through Public Service Commission by the Government of Madhya Pradesh. On .1967 the petitioner joined the said post of Assistant Surgeon. The petitioner was transferred to ITBP on deputation in public interest and thereafter as mentioned above he was absorbed in the ITBP. Mr. Bhat has contended that in such an eventuality it was incumbent that the respondent ought to have taken into
consideration the length of service of the petitioner for the purpose of promotion and fixation of seniority. second argument advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner is that in any event of the matter, the revised grade of Rs.700-1300, which was granted to the other doctors from 1.1.1973 was to be given to the petitioner from the date as the petitioner had already joined the ITBP and the absorption of the petitioner subsequently on 28.6.1973 was an acknowledgement of the fact, which was already in existence. In support of his contention, Mr.Bhat has relied
upon Joginder Nath and Others Vs. Union of India, and K. Madhvan and Another Vs. Union of
Indian and others, .”
Dealing with the scheme, this Court held:-
“Coming to the second submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is entitled to maintain his seniority on the basis of the length of service, which we had done in the Health Department of State of Madhya Pradesh. The law is well-settled by the Supreme Court on this point in the case of Joginder Nath and others Vs. Union of India and others (supra), in which the Supreme Court held:-
“…..The assignment of duties was to follow on the basis of niority list. Arranging the seniority of the candidates recommended by the Selection Committee in accordance with the length of service rendered by them in the judicial cadre to which they belonged at the time of their initial recruitment to the service was perfectly good……. The questions posed are suggestive of the answers. Taking the length of service rendered by the candi-
dates in their respective cadres for the purpose of fixation of seniority under Rule 11 of the Delhi Judicial Rules was justified, legal and valid. Had it been otherwise it would have been discriminatory. It was not equating unequals with equals. It was merely placing two classes at par for the purpose of seniority when it became a single class in the integrated judicial service of Delhi. For the purpose of fixation of seniority it would have been highly unjust and unreasonable to take the date of their nitial recruitment to the service as their first appointment. Nor was it possible to take any other date in between the period of their service in their parent cadre. It would have been wholly
arbitrary. In our judgment, therefore, there was no escape from the position that the entire length of service of the two classes of officers had got to be counted for the purpose of determination of their seniority on their initial recruitment to the Delhi Judicial Service.
Following the above principles and the dicta laid down by the Supreme Court in K.Madhvan and another Vs. Union of India and others (supra), it would be doing injustice to the petitioner if his continuous length of service, which he has done in the State of Madhya Pradesh, is not counted for the purpose of granting him seniority in the ITBP.”
I fail to see how this would be of any assistance to the petitioners.
43. In “Ms. Mohini Rautels Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi”, , this Court dealt with the claim of Assistant Teachers who ere working in Nehru Adarsh Primary School, who were declared surplus and stood transferred to MCD Primary School. The case of the petitioner in that case was that MCD was paying only 95% of the salary. In Rule 47 of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973 the guidelines have been given as to how the employees who are declared surplus and absorbed by the Government should be treated. This Court observed:-
“Rule 47(2)(a) clearly mention that the salary and other allowances last drawn by him at the school from which he has become urplus shall be protected. In this view of the matter, there seems to be no justification for not paying full salary and allowances to the petitioners and other similarly placed employees who have not approached this court.”
This is also not helpful for the present purpose.
44. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner, Mr. M.N. Krishnamani, referred to another proposition that only in cases where transfer of an employee is stayed on his request, he will lose his past service, yet he is treated as next to the last person who was recruited or promoted to the same post before his joining for the purpose of seniority. The learned senior counsel for the petitioners, Mr. M.N. Krishnamani, referred to the judgment in “Arun Kumar Chatterjee Vs. South Eastern Railway & Others”, . The situation in that case is different and the above proposition with reference to transfer on voluntary basis cannot be disputed.
45. The next proposition put forth in support of the case of the petitioner by the learned senior counsel, Mr. M.N. Krishnamani, was that the Supreme Court had held that if pay protection is given by the device of amalgamation and compulsory transfer, the employee concerned should be given full benefit of the past service. The learned senior counsel referred to the judgment in “Tej Narain Tiwary Vs. State of Bihar & Others”, 1993 Supp (2) SCC 623. I do not find any proposition that is relevant to the instant case laid down by the Supreme Court.
46. The learned senior counsel for the petitioners, Mr. M.N. Krishnamani, further submitted that the Supreme Court had held that the ad hoc service has to be counted if it is continuous and if such appointment is not contrary to the rules. The learned counsel for petitioners, Mr. M.N. Krishnamani, referred to the following judgments:-
1. "Direct Recruit Class II Engineering Officers' Association Vs. State of Maharashtra", .
2. "I.K. Sukhija & Others Vs. Union of India & Others", .
3. "Shri Bishamber Nath Vs. Union of India & Others, 1995 III
AD (Delhi) 905.
I do not find any thing useful in those cases for the present discussion.
47. The learned senior counsel for the petitioners, Mr. M.N. Krishnamani
referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in “Reserve Bank of India Vs. N.C. Paliwal & Others”, . This is also easily distinguishable and does not apply, in my view, to the facts and circumstances of this case.
48. In my view, the respondents had acted in accordance with law and the petitioners have not made out any case for interference. Accordingly, both the writ petitions are dismissed.
49. There shall be no order as to costs.