SANTOSH KUMAR Vs. G R CHAWLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The questions involved in these appeals are identical and they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) These appeals are directed against the common judgment dated 6-5-1994 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Writ Petition Nos. 731 of 1991, 251 of 1994, 309 of 1994, 1897 of 1980 and 1663 of 1991.

(3.) The facts, in short, are as follows :- According to the appellants, they were eligible for appointment to the posts in question and the appointments were made on the basis of selection made pursuant to the public advertisement and after considering claims of all eligible candidates. In these circumstances, it was submitted that the entire length of service of the appellants is entitled to be considered for the purpose of seniority as held by the Constitution Bench of the Court in the case of Direct Recruit Class II Engineering Officers Association vs. State of Maharashtra and others (1990) 2 SCC 715. However, the High Court held that ad hoc services cannot be counted for the purpose of seniority. It was further submitted that if the ad hoc appointment is made after satisfying all tests for regular appointment and after considering the claims of all eligible candidates, these appointments must be treated as substantive appointments for the purpose of seniority and that the High Court fell in error in excluding such period from seniority.