JUDGMENT

SHARMA, J,— Civil Appeal No. 173 of 1986- By the judgment under appeal the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal has accepted the claim of seniority pressed by the respondents in their Representation Petition No. 1589 of 1983.

2. The respondents were working as Lower Division Clerks (LDCs) in the district police offices/units in Andhra Pradesh, when the question of appointing LDCs in the Chief Office arose. It was decided to give an opportunity to the LDCs working in the district police offices/units on the condition that they would be willing not to rely upon their service rendered in the district police offices/units for the purpose of seniority and that their seniority would be counted with effect from the date they joined the Chief Office. Accordingly a Memorandum Re. No. 1020/S1/68 dated November 21, 1968 (Annexure A) was issued to the district police offices/units. The choice was limited to probationers and approved probationers having good service records. The letter expressly stated that the appointees were to be put at the bottom of the list of probationers or approved probationers already working in the Chief Office. Immediately thereafter the respondents and two other LDCs, who are not parties to the present case, expressed their desire to join the Chief Office on the condition as mentioned in the said memorandum. They in positive terms declared in Annexure C series their willingness to forgo their seniority. Aft ;r examination of their service records, orders were passed and accordingly Memorandum Rc. No. 1020/S1/68 dated June 1, 1970 (Annexure D) was issued to the heads of departments of the concerned district police offices/units. A pointed reference to the memorandum of November 21, 1968 was made stating that the clerks in question were to take their seniority from the date of their joining the duty in the Chief Office as already mentioned in their letters. Accordingly, all the five respondents joined their duty in the Chief Office after submitting, with reference to the memorandum dated June 1, 1970, separate letters (at pages 40-44 of the paper book) addressed to the Inspector General of Police, stating that.

"I submit that I am willing to take the last rank in seniority in the category of LDCs in Chief Office from the date reporting duty in Chief Office."

Their respective dates, of joining the Chief Office are detailed in the Memorandum dated September 7, 1970, Annexure H (page 47 of the paper book). They were placed on probation with the condition that if they failed to complete their probation satisfactorily they would be sent back to their original district/unit offices.

3. The respondent satisfactorily completed their probation and were substantively confirmed in the Chief Office and their seniority was counted with effect from the dates they joined the Chief Office. In 1983 they filed an application before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal claiming that they were entitled to count their service rendered in the district police offices/units for the purpose of their seniority in the Chief Office, which has been allowed by the impugned judgment.

4. In support of their claim the respondents relied on the Memorandum Re. No. 1020/S1/68 dated January 18, 1969 (Annexure B) issued by the office of the Inspector General of Police to the heads of the district police organisations/units, stating that:

"In continuation of the Chief Office, Memorandum cited, the Commissioner of Police, all Superintendents of Police and Commandants etc. are requested to state whether there are any LD Clerks willing to come on transfer to Chief Office, if the condition stipulated in the Memorandum cited regarding taking of last rank is not insisted upon. The records of the LD Clerks recommended should be good."

It has been argued before the Tribunal as also before us that this letter clearly indicates that adequate number of clerks from the district police offices/units were not available and a decision to forgo the conditi