(1 ) SPECIAL leave granted in all the special leave petitions. Heard counsel for the parties in all the appeals.

( 2 ) OUR experience shows that disputes of this nature arise mainly on account of either the ignorance of the authorities who issue instructions in the matter of reservation from time to time, or on account of a deliberate distortion of the law of reservation and of the implementation of the rules and instructions relating to it. The present cases are a good example of the same.

( 3 ) WE are concerned here with the Scheduled Caste and Backward Class candidates and their appointment to the reserved posts which were at the relevant time designated as Head Assistants, and are presently redesignated as Deputy superintendents, in the various Departments of the State government.

( 4 ) IN supersession of the earlier instructions on the subject, the State government, on 9/2/1979 introduced reservations both in the direct recruitment and in the promotions in the State Employment in Class III and Class IV services. For that purpose, not only it laid down the percentage of reservations for different classes, but also introduced a roster of 100 points. The reservations in favour of Scheduled Castes was 20 per cent and that in favour of Backward classes was 5 per cent. The roster indicated points at which the Scheduled Caste and Backward Class candidates would be given appointment both in directrecruitment and in promotion. We are concerned in the present case with appointments of the Scheduled Caste and Backward Class candidates by promotion to the said post of Deputy Superintendent, which is a Class III post. According to the roster points introduced, the Scheduled Caste candidates should be appointed at points 4,8,14,18 and so on up to 100 and the backward class candidates at points at 10, 16, 32 and so on. Between 9/2/1979 and 15/7/1987, candidates all belonging to the General category were appointed by promotion to the said post in some of the departments ignoring the claims of the Scheduled caste candidates who ought to have been appointed, as stated above at the relevant roster points. On the other hand, the candidates appointed earlier according to the roster points in some other departments were reverted. In WP no. 3184 of 1989 and WP No. 10096 of 1989, when the Scheduled Caste candidates approached the High court against their reversion, the learned Single judge quashed the order of reversion. Writ Petition No. 11583 of 1989 was filed by the writ petitioner in WP No. 3184 of 1989 against the further appointment of a General category candidate ordering to the roster point as introduced by circular dated 9/2/1979. This decision was upheld by the division bench of the High court in the letters patent appeal.

( 5 ) IT is aggrieved by the said decision of the division bench that the present civil have been filed by the General category candidates as well as by the State.

( 6 ) THE main contention on behalf of the appellants is that the circular dated 9/2/1979 stood amended by the letter of the Chief secretary to the Social welfare Department written on 27/5/1988 and by the letter of Finance commissioner written to the Supplies and Disposal Department on 8/3/1989. These letters in substance stated that whenever there were two posts, the same were not to be filled in by applying the reservation policy. We find no merit in this contention. In the first instance, both the said letters do not show that they have been issued as a consequence of any decision of the State government. On the other hand, the first letter of 27/5/1988 which is written by the Chief secretary to the Commissioner and secretary of the Social Welfare Department, merely states that the matter has been examined by the Chief secretary and it is advised that in a cadre where there are only two posts, the reservation benefit is not admissible. As stated earlier, apart from the fact that the letter does not indicate that it is issued under the instructions of t