JUDGMENT

SAWANT, J.:—Leave granted.

2. Although the facts are many, the only question involved in the present case is whether the appellant is entitled to the benefit of his service as Jailor from 26/27th June, 1969 to 30th September, 1969 as a qualifying period of service for being appointed to the post of the Deputy Superintendent of Jails on 30th July, 1977. The said service has also a bearing on his seniority as a Deputy Superintendent of jails over respondents 1 to 3 who were directly appointed as Deputy Superintendent of jails on 25th September, 1979 and completed their probation in 1981.

3. The admitted facts are that the appellant is an Ex-Air Force Officer and possesses a Commerce and a Law Degree. By the order of 24th June, 1969, he was appointed as jailor in the scale of Rs. 180-375/- temporarily under R. 10(a)(1)(i) of the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Services Rules (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) and he assumed office on 26th June, 1969 as Jailor at Camp M Jail, Yrragadda, as is evidenced by the order of June 27, 1969. On the date he assumed office, the temporary jail at Yrragadda was in existence and it was closed only w.e.f. 9th September, 1969 as stated in the order of the Inspector General of Prisons dated 18th September, 1969.

4. On 6th August, 1969 the I.G. (Prisons) wrote a letter to the Home Secretary requesting for relaxation of R. 9 of the A.P. Jail Subordinate Service Rules which required training for a period of 9 months for a direct recruit to the post of the Jailor. In this letter, the I.G. (Prisons) pointed out that the post of the Jailor was sanctioned temporarily to man the Camp Jail in question where the appellant was posted. There was a need of persons who could maintain discipline in jails and such persons could be available only from the military service. Instead of, therefore, recruiting fresh hands and placing them under training, in view of the urgency, he had directly appointed, through the Employment Exchange, the appellant who had the requisite educational qualifications, was within the prescribed age limit and who had also worked as a non-commissioned officer in the Indian Air Force for 10 years and 10 months. He was directly appointed to the post without imparting training as it was considered unnecessary. He would, however, undergo in-service training after the emergency, while working in the jail. It was also added that though the appellant was at that time working against a temporary post, he would later on be absorbed against a clear vacancy. It appears that on account of the closure of the Camp Jail where the appellant was posted, the relaxation of R. 9 became unnecessary since the appellant was in the meanwhile, by order dated October 3, 1969 appointed as District Probation Officer (D.P.O.) Grade II w.e.f. 6th October, 1969 with a pay-scale of Rs. 200-400/-. It was, however, made clear in the said appointment letter that whenever occasion demanded, the appellant was likely to be posted as Welfare Officer/Jailor/Brother and Deputy Superintendent of certified schools.

5. It appears that barely 8 months thereafter, by the order dated 16-6-1970, the appellant was transferred and posted temporarily as Jailor at Maullaali Agricultural Colony Jail. On 2nd November, 1971, the I. G. (Prisons) wrote a letter to the Home Secretary of the State Government pointing out that the appellant was directly recruited as Jailor temporarily during the Telangana agitation and later, on account of the abolition of the temporary post of the Deputy Superintendent of Jails and consequent reversions, he was absorbed as D.P.O. Grade II w.e.f. 6th October, 1969 to 29th June, 1970. However, since his initial appointment was to the post of Jailor, he was taken back as Jailor when a clear vacancy arose treating him as a direct recruit to the post of the Jailor w.e.f. 27th June, 1969. He also pointed out that his period of training on appointment as D.P.O. Grade II in between, was treated as service on