JUDGMENT

K. JAYACHANDRA REDDY, J.:-The questions involved in these matters being common they are being disposed of by a common judgment. All these matters arise out of a common order of the A. P. Administrative Tribunal passed in Representation Petitions Nos. 799/77, 548/79 and 140/81. S.L.P. (Civil) No. 5218/ 85 is filed against a separate order of the Tribunal in R. P. No. 1473/80. The dispute is regarding the inter se seniority between the Supervisors who are upgraded as Junior Engineers and the degree-holders who are directly appointed as Junior Engineers. All of them belong to the different branches in the A.P. Engineering Subordinate Service. First we shall state the relevant facts in each of the appeals and then formulate the points that arise for consideration. For convenience sake we shall refer to the parties as arrayed before the Tribunal.

CIVIL APPEALS NOS. 752 AND 754/ 84:

2. These two appeals are filed against the order in R.P. No. 799/ 77. The first one is filed by the State of A.P. and the other one by upgraded Supervisors - Junior Engineers. The petitioners before the Tribunal are all Junior Engineers in Irrigation and Power Department. They were initially appointed as temporary Junior Engineers in the year 1969-70. Later they appeared in a special qualifying test (SQT for short) held by the Public Service Commission and on the basis of the result of the test their services were regularised in the post of Junior Engineers with retrospective effect from the date of the temporary appointment subject to the maintenance of the order of ranking given by the Public Service Commission in the test. The respondents Nos. 3 onwards in these R.Ps. are also Junior Engineers in the same department but they were appointed as Supervisors and on acquiring the degree they have been redesignated as Junior Engineers. Several G. O. Ms. were issued by the Government and the important one is G.O. Ms. No. 559 (I&P) Department dated 18-7-77. The post of Junior Engineer was made Gazetted post. The case of the petitioners is that the respondents acquired degree qualification after 28-2-72 therefore they were not entitled to be appointed as regular Gazetted Junior Engineers and at any rate they cannot be treated as seniors on the basis of reckoning their seniority from the date of acquiring degree qualification and that the seniority of these graduate Super-visors should be reckoned from the date of their actual appointment as Junior Engineers and not from the date of acquiring degree qualification. The respondent Supervisors, on the other hand, contended that they are entitled to upgradation and weightage of service from the date of their first appointment as Supervisors.

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 753/84:

3. This appeal is filed against the order in R.P.No.548/79 The petitioners in this R.P are all Supervisors who graduated after 28-2-72. Their contention was that they were appointed much before the respondents namely the directly recruited Junior Engineers and the services of the respondents Junior Engineers should not be regularised in such a way so as to affect the seniority of the petitioners and that the seniority of the petitioners should be reckoned from the notional date of appointment.

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 755/84:

4. This appeal is filed against the order in R.P. No. 140/ 81. The sole petitioners before the Tribunal, who is a respondent here, questioned G.O. Ms. No. 466 Transport, Roads and Buildings and- sought a declaration that he should be declared as senior to respondents Nos. 3 and 5 and promote him to the post of Assistant Engineer. The petitioner before the Tribunal was directly recruited Junior Engineer. He also passed the SQT held in the year 1975. The respondents before the Tribunal were upgraded Supervisors who acquired the graduate qualification. G.O. Ms. No. 466 was issued directing that the respondents before the Tribunal namely the upgraded Supervisors should be treated seniors to all the directly recruited Junior Engineers whose s