JUDGMENT

RANGANATH MISRA, J.:— Writ Petitions Nos. 711, 1100, 1272-73 of 1986 are applications under Article 32 of the Constitution by a set of direct recruits to the U. P. Police Service Class II while Writ Petition No. 13409 of 1983 is by a set of promotees to the said service. A writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution and bearing No. 1449 of 1985 before the Allahabad High Court by a set of promotees challenging the order of the U. P. Public Services Tribunal (Lucknow Bench) has been transferred to this Court and has been registered as Transferred Case No. 23 of 1987. Writ Petition No. 4475 of 1984 filed before the Allahabad High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution at the instance of the State of Uttar Pradesh and its Inspector General of Police against the same decision of the U. P. Public Services Tribunal has also been transferred to this Court and registered as Transferred Case No. 25 of 1987. Writ Petition No. 10751 of 1984 filed before the Allahabad High Court by different sets of promotees for a direction to the State Government to appoint the petitioners therein in terms of the recommendations of the State Public Service Commission and for treating such appointments as substantive has been transferred to this Court and registered as Transferred Case No. 24 of 1987. In all these applications excepting the last one the dispute is mainly one relating to inter se seniority. All these writ petitions have been heard analogously and are being disposed of by the common judgment of this Court.

2. The dispute relating to inter se seniority in these applications has to be disposed of on an appropriate interpretation of the Uttar Pradesh Police Service Rules, 1942 framed under Section 241 of the Government of India Act, 1935. Straightway we may proceed to analyse the Rules.

3. Rule 2 indicates that the status of the service is Uttar Pradesh Police Service which is a State Service in Class II. Rule3(g) defines "Member of the Service" to mean :

"A person appointed in a substantive capacity under the provisions of these rules or of rules in force previous to the introduction of these rules to a post in the cadre of the service and includes every such officer who was appointed as temporary Deputy Superintendent of Police under the stated notifications and subsequently appointed in a substantive capacity from the date of his substantive appointment."

Rule 4 authorises the Governor to determine the strength of the service from time to time and until the permanent strength is varied the strength would be as shown in the appendix. Rule 5 prescribes that recruitment to the service shall be made on the basis of the result of a competitive examination conducted by the State Public Service Commission and by promotion of permanent Inspectors of Police. The proviso to the said rule authorises the Governor in the interest of the public service to sanction the appointment of Sub-Inspectors of Police who have been approved for substantive appointments of Inspectors of Police and have officiated as Inspectors for not less than two years. Rule 7 provides that the Governor shall decide the number of recruits to be taken from each of the two sources specified in Rule 5 and the proviso prescribes that not less than half the number of candidates to be recruited each year shall be recruited by promotion. Part V of the Rules lays down the procedure for direct recruitment while Part VI deals with recruitment by promotion. Rule 17(l) provides :-

"1. For purposes of recruitment under Rule 5(ii) a selection based on the criteria of merit shall be made in the manner hereinafter provided from amongst permanent Inspectors of Police."

Sub-rule (7) provides :-

"The names of the candidates selected in the first list, up to the number of permanent vacancies intended to be filled substantively during the course of the year, shall be drawn up and rearranged in order of seniority and they will be appointed against substantive vacancies in the cadr