Judgment

N. P. SINGH

( 1 ) THE appellants in three appeals filed a writ application before the High Court, claiming seniority over respondents Nos. 2 to 29 of the said application and sought a direction from the High Court, for correction of the seniority list of Assistant Engineers Class II, published by the Haryana State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as "the Board" ). The said writ application was dismissed by a learned Judge of the High Court. The appeal filed on behalf of the appellants was also dismissed by the said High Court.

( 2 ) AN advertisement dated 30/06/1967 was published by the Board inviting applications for the posts of Assistant Engineers Class II (Electrical) and Apprentice Engineers (Electrical ). Pursuant to the said advertisement, the appellants made applications for Apprentice Engineers (Electrical ). The advertisement prescribed three conditions. The first condition was in respect of the academic qualifications. The second condition relating to the period of apprenticeship was as follows :-

"he will have to undergo apprenticeship for a period of six months of such period as may be decided by the Board which can be extended up to a maximum of three years. After completion of the said training, they will be considered for appointment to the post of Assistant Engineer Class II in the scale of Rs. 350-25450/40-M/40-800 with starting salary of Rs. 350. 00 p. m. on the basis of their work and conduct. "

THE third condition was in respect of giving in undertaking in writing that the candidate shall serve the board for a period of two years after completion of his training. In the offer of appointment issued to the appellants, it was said:-

"apprenticeship: You will have to undergo apprenticeship for a period of one year or such period as may be decided by the Board. After completion of the above said training" you will be considered for appointment to the post of Asstt. Engineer Class-II in the scale of Rs. 350-25450/30-600/eb40-800 at the basic pay of Rs- 350/- p. m. on the basis of your work and conduct. "

( 3 ) AFTER completion of the training in terms of the advertisement and the offer of appointment, the appellants were appointed as Assistant Engineers Class-II, w. e. f. 1/01/1969.

( 4 ) IT may be mentioned that another advertisement dated 14/07/1968 had been published by the Board for filling up the posts of Assistant Engineers Class II and pursuant to that advertisement, respondents Nos. 2 to 29 (hereinafter referred to as "the respondents") made applications and they were selected and appointed between October and December, 1968 as Assistant Engineers Class II. As the respondents aforesaid had been appointed between October and December, 1968 and the appellants had been appointed w. e. f. 1-1-1969, in the seniority list which was published, the respondents were shown above the appellants. There is no dispute that so far the appellants are concerned, they were appointed as Assistant Engineers Class II by an order dated 18/04/1969, w. e. f. 1-1-1969 after completion of their apprenticeship, whereas the respondents were appointed as Assistant Engineers Class 11 before 1-1-1969. There was some confusion in respect of respondents Nos. 6 16 17 -and 28 as to whether they had also been appointed prior to 1-1-1969, but during hearing of the appeals, an affidavit was filed on behalf of the Board giving the dates of their appointments as 23-10-1968, 21-11-1968, 21-11-1968 and 6-12-1968 respectively. Photo copies of their appointment letters have been annexed along with the affidavit. They, however, joined later. It is well known that while determining the seniority of an officer, the date of his appointment is more important factor than the date of his joining. In many compelling circumstances like accident, the distance at which a particular candidate resides and the time taken by him to join cannot be ignored. So far the present case is concerned, respondents Nos. 6, 16, 17 and 28 were not only appointed