JUDGMENT

G . N. RAY, J. :—Leave granted.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Both the appeals arise out of a common judgment dated January 11, 1993 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench in O.A. No. 152 of 1989 (Satpal Antil v. Union of India and another) and in O.A. No. 98 of 1989 (Jitendra Kumar Gota v. Union of India and others). Both these appeals involving same question of law and similar facts have been heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.

3. The appellant, Satpal Antil, was initially appointed as Junior Engineer (Civil) in the Telecommunication Department Civil Division on January 10, 1987. For promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil), a Notification was issued inviting the persons who are already in service as Junior Engineer (Civil) in the Telecommunication Department. Civil Division to appear in the qualifying examination scheduled to be held on 16/17-3-1987. Both the appellants Satpal Antil and Jitendra Kumar Gupta appeared in the said examination and were declared successful. It appears that previously an application was filed before the Tribunal by the appellants inter alia contending that even though qualified persons like the appellants were available, the Department was making ad hoc promotions to the post of Assistant Engineer without holding the DPC by the Department for regular promotion. It appears that vide its Order dated November 4, 1988 in O.A.No. 359 of 1987 the Central Administrative Tribunal directed the respondents to convene the DPC for the purpose of filling up the vacancies in the cadre of Assistant Engineer (Civil) out of the promotion quota within a period of four months from the date of the decision and to give the benefits to the eligible candidates by way of promotion in accordance with the recommendations of DPC. After the said judgment of the Tribunal the Department of Telecommunications issued a letter dated November 21, 1988 duly signed so as to enable the Department to recast the all India eligibility of Junior Engineers. Pursuant to such letter, the Superintendent Engineer (Civil) sent the seniority list of Junior Engineers (Civil) of his circle vide letter dated January 5, 1989. The names of the appellants Satpal Antil and Jitendra Kumar Gupta had been shown respectively at Serial Nos. 20 and 27 in the Seniority List. On September 26, 1989, DPC considered the case of the eligible candidates. The appellants, however, contended that the appellants having passed qualifying examination in March 1987, should be treated as senior to the person who had passed qualifying examination at the a later date. The appellants also contended that promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer should be given in accordance with the para 206 of the P & T Manual Vol. IV. The appellants contended that the eligibility list on all India basis of the persons who were qualified to be promoted to the post of Engineers should be prepared first keeping in view the provisions of para 206 of P & T Manual and the judgements passed by the Calcutta and Madras Benches of Central Administrative Tribunal should be given effect to in this regard. The appellants also contended that they should be given promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) with effect from the date on which the appellants had completed 8 years of qualifying service on the post of Junior Engineer with all consequential benefits. The respondents, however, contended before the Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, that the respondents had implemented the direction of the Jaipur Bench passed in O.A. No. 359 of 1987 and held DPC. It was also pointed out by the respondents that the Calcutta Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 599 of 1986 had observed vide its order dated February 6, 1987 that the applicants who had lost two years in which examination should have been held, should be given another chance to appear in the examination to be held within a period of six months after the p