JUDGMENT

DUTT, J.:— Special leave is granted in all the matters. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. These appeals are directed against the judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi, whereby the Tribunal directed that the seniority of the appellants in Grade IV of the Central Information Service (hereinafter referred to as the CIS) as Simla Monitors/Information Assistants/Sub-Editors, as the case may be should be counted only from the dates the posts held by them were included in Grade IV of the CIS.

3. The appellants had been working as Monitors in All India Radio since March, 1959. As the appellants had been performing the same duties as performed by the officers in Grade IV of the CIS, the Government decided on the basis of the report of the Working Group that the pay scale of the Monitors should be revised so that the same might be brought at par with Grade IV of the CIS. Accordingly, the pay scale of Monitors was revised from Rs. 210-425 to Rs. 270-485 by the Government order dated June 29, 1968, The posts of Monitors were also redesignated as Sub-Editors (Monitoring). In other words the posts of Monitors were brought at par with those in Grade IV of the CIS.

4. At this stage, it is necessary to refer to R. 6 -B of the Central Information Service Rules, 1959. hereinafter referred to as the Rules, which provides as follows :

"6B. Inclusion and exclusion of posts :

(1) The Government may, in consultation with the Commission include in the service any posts other than those included in Schedules I to VII or exclude from the Service a post included in Schedules I to VII from time to time, by way of amendment of the relevant Schedule and when a schedule is so amended, any reference to that Schedule in these rules shall be construed as a reference to such schedule as so amended.

(2) The Government may, in consultation with the Commission, appoint an officer the post held by whom is included in the Service, under sub-rule (1), to the appropriate grade of the Service, in a temporary capacity or in a substantive capacity, as may be deemed fit, and fix his seniority in the grade, again in consultation with the Commission whereupon such a post shall not be reckoned for determining the number of posts to be filled by promotion or by direct recruitment, under Rule 6.

Provided that the officer was appointed to the post either on the recommendations of the Commission or of the Departmental Promotion Committee concerned or in accordance with the rules of recruitment applicable to the post, as the case may be."

5. It appears from sub-rule (1) of R. 6B, as extracted above, that the inclusion or exclusion of any post in the CIS may be made by way of amendment of the relevant Schedule. Under sub-rule (2) of R. 6B, after a. post is included in the CIS under sub-rule (1), the Government may appoint an officer in such post and fix his seniority in the grade. Although the posts of Monitors were re-designated as Sub-Editors (Monitoring) and pay scale attached to the posts was enhanced to that of Grade IV of the CIS with a view to including the posts of Monitors so redesignated in the CIS as Grade IV, such inclusion was not actually made by the amendment of relevant schedule, as required under sub-rule (1) of Rule 6B. Such amendment was, however, made sometime in 1971 and by a Government notification dated May 9, 1972, the appellants and others were appointed in officiating capacities to Grade IV posts in the CIS with effect from November 6. 1971 until further orders. The notification further directed as follows : -

"The above officers will be placed an bloc after 1965 batch and above 1969 batch i.e. below Shri R.C.S. Mohapatra and above Shri S. Sivasankara Pillai."

6. The inter se seniority of the Monitors so inducted into Grade IV of the CIS, was fixed after obtaining the approval of the Department of Personnel and of the Union Public Service Commission. In view of the said notification, the seniority of the Monitors, i