JUDGMENT

RANGANATH MISRA, C.J.I. — The civil appeals are by special leave and the writ petition is under Article 32 of the Constitution. The Civil Appeal (sic) of 1985 is directed against an affirming Division Bench decision of the Madras High Court dated August 16, 1984 in a writ appeal while the two other civil appeals are directed against two separate judgments of the Central Administrative Tribunal made in 1987 following the aforesaid Madras decision. The writ petition as will be presently indicated is by 29 petitioners who had not been regularly recruited to the service but later by amendment of the Rules were regularised in service in 1977.

2. The service with which we are concerned in this group of cases is known as "Central Information Service" (CIS for short). This service was constituted by the Central Information Service Rules, 1959 framed by the President in exercise of powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution with effect from March 1, 1960 in terms of Rule 5. This was on the basis of selecting 400 departmental candidates as defined in Rule 2-B of the Rules. Rule 6 provides that after the initial constitution of the service, future vacancies in grade IV would be filled by direct recruitment on the basis of the result of a competitive examination conducted by the Union Public Service Commission in accordance with the educational qualifications and age limit mentioned in Schedule VIII and the scheme of examination which is to be finalised in consultation with the Commission.

3. Under Rule 4 the service has seven tiers beginning with grade IV and going up to the selection grade. Direct recruitment is to grade IV and the higher grades are manned on the basis of promotion. The requirements of promotional qualifications are in Rule 6-A. In this group of cases the dispute is one of inter se seniority among direct recruits to grade IV.

4. After the initial constitution there were four recruitments up to 1970, being in 1964, 1965, 1969 and 1970. It appears that in 1964 there was con donation of the age bar and 141 candidates had appeared but 22 qualified. In 1965 and 1970 perhaps there was no relaxation of age while in 1969 the prescribed age was relaxed. In the service there were 68 ad hoc employees who have been regularised in the subsequent recruitments referred to above while there were 73 other ad hoc employees who either took the examination and failed or never sat at the examinations to become regular recruits until the second proviso was added to Rule 6-A of the Rules and the order regularising their service was made by notification dated January 27, 1977. The provision in question reads thus:

"Provided further that persons appointed on or before July 1, 1976 to discharge the duties and functions of the posts included in grade IV of the Central Information Service to make good the shortfall in the filling up of vacancies in the grade by the abovementioned method and who have discharged the duties and responsibilities of the post included in grade IV of the service for at least five years shall be appointed to the grade after they are screened by a Selection Committee to determine their suitability for appointment."

5. In terms of this proviso the notification of January 27, 1977, was issued to the following effect:

"Under second proviso to Rule 6-A of the Central Information Service Rules, 1959 as amended from time to time the following officers holding ad hoc appointment against grade IV posts of the CIS are hereby appointed on regular basis in grade IV of the Central Information Service with effect from January 4, 1977 until further orders....

The above officers will be placed en bloc. in the same order below the last grade IV officers appointed on the basis of 1970 examination i.e. below Shri Sita Ram No. (sic)".

6. Mr V. Thirunavukkarasu, respondent 1, in the Civil Appeal of 1985 whose services were regularised by the order of January 27, 1977 with effect from January 4, 1977 - and his name occ