Judgment

RANGANATH MISRA, J. - The appeals are by special leave and are directed against the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in a group of representation petitions while the writ petitions are under Article 32 of the Constitution, Writ Petition 72 of 1987 being by promotee Deputy Tehsildars and Writ Petition 241 of 1987 being by another group of Deputy Tehsildars promoted by transfer.

2. The background of the litigations may now be indicated. A set of rules regarding recruitment of Deputy Tehsildars was in force in the erstwhile State of Madras which continued to apply to Andhra Pradesh until in 1961 the Andhra Pradesh Revenue Subordinate Service Rules (hereinafter referred to as the Special Rules ) were brought into force. The cadre under the Special Rules consisted of Deputy Tehsildars only. Rule 3 provided :-

"3. Appointment :- (a) Appointment to the category of Deputy Tehsildars in this service shall be made :-

i) by direct recruitment, or

ii) by transfer from members of the Andhra Pradesh Ministerial Service employed in the Revenue Department including the office of the Commissioner of Land Revenue, Revenue Settlement parties and the office of the Director of Settlements Survey and Land Records.

(b) substantive vacancies in the category of Deputy Tehsildars shall be filled or reserved to be filled by direct recruitment and recruitment by transfer in the proportion of 1 : 1

Some directly recruited Deputy Tehsildars during the years 1962 and 1963 moved the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Writ Petition No. 1502 of 1971 disputing the seniority over them assigned to a group of promotees. They alleged that though they had completed their probation long prior to the Upper Division Clerks who were appointed by transfer as Deputy Tehsildars and had become full members of the service upon confirmation in their posts while none of the Upper Division Clerks appointed by transfer had become full members, yet the directly recruited Deputy Tehsildars had been treated as junior and their claim to promotion as Tehsildars was being overlooked. A learned single Judge of the High Court dismissed the writ petition by holding that there was no foundation for the grievance of the directly recruited Deputy Tehsildars and that they had no cause of action within the frame of the rules. The decision of the learned single Judge was upheld in appeal by a Division Bench. Support for that position was derived from Rule 33(a) of the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Services Rules, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the General Rules ). A special leave petition was filed before this Court against the appellate decision of the High Court.

3. On 9th October, 1980, the State Government amended Rule 4(e) of the Special Rules with retrospective effect from 12th of October, 1961 in the manner indicated below :-

"In sub-rule (e) of Rule 4 of the said Rules, for the words. The seniority of the Deputy Tehsildar shall be determined with reference to the date of allotment maintained and the ranking assigned to him by the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission in the merit list of that selection , the following shall be substituted, namely, the inter se seniority between the direct recruits to the category of Deputy Tehsildars and the promotees to the category of Deputy Tehsildars shall be determined from the date of their confirmation in the substantive vacancy in that category in the proportion of 1 : 1 as provided in sub-rule (b) of Rule 3.

A group of promotees who are appellants in the civil appeals went before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal questioning the validity of the aforesaid amendment with particular emphasis on its retrospective application. The Tribunal referred the matter to a three-Judge Bench thereof. Before the Tribunal, it was canvassed on behalf of the appellants that the prevailing rule regarding seniority was in Rule 33 of the General Rules and in the absence of any provision in the special Rules, the principle in