JUDGMENT

SAWANT, J.:- These three petitions raise some common issues, and hence they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

This petition is filed by the promotee Income-tax Officers Group-A seeking to challenge the Seniority Rules of 1973 on the ground that they were framed pursuant to a direction given by this Court in Bishan Sarup Gupta v. Union of India, 1975 Suppl SCR 491, decided on August 16, 1972. According to the petitioners, the said direction was given because for want of sufficient material, the Court had come to the conclusion that the quota for recruitment of the direct recruits and the promotees had broken down as the promotees were appointed in excess of their entitlement in the quota. According to the petitioner, the requisite material showing the contrary was in the possession of the Government but did not come forth, then. The said material shows that in fact the appointments of the promotees were short of their quota. The petitioners, therefore, claim that not only the Seniority Rules of 1973 should be set aside, but the appointment of the promotees be made and their seniority be fixed, according to the Rules prevailing prior to the said Rules.

2. The relevant facts necessary to dispose of the petition are as follows:

Pursuant to the Rules propounded in their letter of September 29, 1944, the Government reorganised the existing Income-tax Services into Class-I and Class-III. The Rules, among other things, laid down that the recruitment to the cadre of Income-tax Officers - Group A will be from two sources, viz., direct recruitment and promotion, the quota for the two being 80 - 20 respectively.

In 1945, the Government framed fresh Recruitment Rules for the said cadre of Class1 and Class-II, I-T.Os. Rule 3 of the said Rules reiterated that the recruitment to the said cadre will be from the two sources, viz., direct recruitment and promotion. Rule 4 of the said Rules, however, provided that the recruitment from the said sources will be made as per the discretion of the Government. This provision had the effect of virtually keeping in abeyance the recruitment quotas for the direct recruits and the promotees laid down in the Recruitment Rules of September 29, 1944.

On September 9, 1949, the Government framed Seniority Rules. Rule 1(f)(iii) thereof provided that the promotees who had been certified by the Federal Public Service Commission in any calendar year shall be senior to all direct recruits who completed their probation during that year or after, and are confirmed With effect from the date in that year or after. On January 1, 1950, the Seniority Rules were revised and the aforesaid Rule (1) (f)(iii) was amended as follows:

"(f) The seniority of direct recruits recruited on the results of the examinations held by the Federal Public Service Commission in 1944 and subsequent years, shall be reckoned as follows:

(i) Direct recruits of an earlier examination shall, rank above those recruited from subsequent examination.

(ii) Direct recruits of any one examination shall rank inter se in accordance with the ranks obtained by them at that examination.

(iii) The promotees who have been certified by the Commission in any calendar year shall be senior to all direct recruits who complete their probation during that year or after and are confirmed with effect from a date in that year or after.

Provided that a person initially recruited as Class-II Income-tax Officer, but subsequently appointed to Class I on the results of a competitive examination conducted by the Federal Public Service Commission shall, if he has passed the departmental examination held before his appointment to Class I service, be deemed to be promotee for the purpose of seniority".

3. By its letter of October 18, 1951, the Government revised the quotas of direct recruits and promotees (which was earlier laid down in their letter of September 29, 1944), from 80 and 20 to, 66-2/3 and 33-1/3 . On September 5, 1952 the Government also revised further