JUDGMENT

Pattanaik, J.

These writ petitions filed under Article 32 of the Constitution by the officers of Delhi Higher Judicial Service, some by the promotees and others by direct recruits, in fact, raise the question as to whether in determining inter-se seniority between the promotees and the direct recruits, the guidelines and directions given by this Court in the case of O.P. Singla & Anr. etc. v. Union of India & Ors., 1985(1) SCR 351. have been duly followed or not? It is rather unfortunate that on an erroneous impression that the judgment in Singla’s case is under consideration before a Constitution Bench, these writ petitions were directed to be placed before a Constitution Bench, resulting thereby inordinate delay in disposal of the matters, which in turn, must have adversely affected the career of several persons. At the beginning of the hearing of these writ petitions, on being asked, the counsel appearing for all the parties, could not indicate any decision where the correctness of judgment of this Court in Singla’s case was under consideration, though in one of these writ petitions filed by a direct recruit, namely Writ Petition No. 1252/90, Mr. Gopal Subramanium, the le