JUDGMENT

M.M. DUTT, J. :— The Writ Petition No, 106 of 1980 under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India preferred by the petitioners, Smt. M. Nirmala and 309 others, and the appeal by special leave filed by the State of Andhra Pradesh have been heard together as they involve the common question as to the seniority of certain employees of the Government of Andhra Pradesh in Group II and Group IV services. Group II services relate to the posts of Junior Assistants in the Secretariat and Group IV services relate to the posts of Lower Division Clerks, Lower Division Assistants, Lower Division Typists and Steno-Typists.

2. The petitioners are working in Group IV services in various Departments of the Government of Andhra Pradesh. On August 18, 1970 by G. 0. Ms. No. 682, the Government of Andhra Pradesh put a ban on direct recruitment of all categories of State and subordinate services, pending the recommendations of the Backward Classes Commission. In spite of the said order banning direct recruitments, the Government had to appoint employees in all Departments in view of exigencies of circumstances and in the public interest. Such appointments were made under the General Rule 10(a)(i)(1) on a purely temporary basis. Most of the petitioners were appointed after April, 1974 as temporary employees under General Rule 10(a)(i)(1). Indeed, General Rule 10(a)(iii) provides that a person appointed under Cl. (i) shall, whether or not he possesses the qualifications prescribed for the service, class or category to which he is appointed, be replaced as soon as possible by a member of the service or an approved candidate qualified to hold the post under the rules. In view of Cl. (iii) of General Rule 10(a), the appointments of the petitioners were to be replaced as soon as possible by qualified and approved candidates.

3. In 1973, the ban on recruitment through Public Service Commission was partially lifted. By G. O. Ms. No. 725 dated Dec. 28, 1973, the Government of Andhra Pradesh directed the Public Service Commission to conduct a special qualifying test for recruitment in Group IV services with a view to regularising the temporary appointments made during the ban period. One of the conditions of eligibility for appearing at the said qualifying test was, as fixed by the Public Service Commission, two years of service as on 1-1-1973. As the petitioners were appointed after April, 1974, the question of their appearing at the said qualifying test did not arise. It appears that those who appeared at the said test were all absorbed in the regular service. On the representation of the temporary employees who were not absorbed, the Public Service Commission conducted another special qualifying test as directed by the Government by G. O. Ms. No. 787 dated Nov. 9, 1976. The petitioners could not avail themselves of the said test as they had not put in two years of services as on 1-1-1976 as fixed by the Public Service Commission.

4. The temporary employees including the petitioners who were appointed on or after Jan. 2, 1974, became eligible only in 1976 in which year a test for recruitment through Public Service Commission was conducted to facilitate all temporary employees including the petitioners to compete for regular appointments. About 82,000 candidates appeared in the test for Group IV services. The petitioners, however, did not appear at the said qualifying test even though they were eligible for the same. At the same time, the petitioners and others, who did not appear at the qualifying test in 1976, began to put pressure on the Government for their absorption. The Government was also prevented from replacing the temporary employees including the petitioners by the candidates who were successful in the said qualifying test. The successful candidates were appointed to additional posts in Group II and Group IV services sometime in 1977 or 1978. The temporary employees made a representation to the Government that their appointments should be regu