The main legal point established in the judgment is the absence of specific rules for determination of inter se seniority and the retrospective regularization of ad hoc promotions. The court emphasized the legal principles governing seniority and the application of recruitment rules to the facts of the case.

1. Leave granted.

2. These appeals involving similar questions of law and fact were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. Appellant as also the private respondents hereto have been working as Assistant Engineers in the Public Works Department. The promotees are diploma holders, or degree holders in Engineering. They were holding the posts of S.O. Grade 1, whereas the direct recruits are Graduates in Engineering. Recruitment to the post of Assistant Engineer and/or promotion thereto, although is governed by the Public Works Department, Manipur Assistant Engineer (Civil/Mech) Surveyor of Works Recruitment Rules of 1969, 1975 and 1984 made under the proviso appended to Article 309 of the Constitution of India; there does not exist any Rule governing seniority and in particular inter se seniority amongst the direct recruits and the promotees.

3. In terms of the recruitment rules, whereas forty per cent of the posts are to be filled by direct recruitment from the open market, 60 per cent of the posts are to be filled up by promotion in the following sub-quota:-

i. 50% by selection from amongst the Engineering Degree holders who have rendered a minimum of 3 years regular service as S.O. Grade I as equivalent Post. Provided that is sufficient number of Degree holders are not available, the vacancies may be filled up by Diploma holders with 8 years regular service as S.O. Grade-I.

ii. 50% by selection from amongst the Engineering Diploma Holders of 3 years course with 8 years regular service as S.O. Grade I or non Degree/non Diploma holders with 15 years outstanding record as S.O. Grade I.

4, Before embarking on the questions involved in these matters, we may notice the fact of the matter.

5. The Government of Manipur informed the Manipur Public Service Commission in regard to existence of 39 vacancies in the posts of Assistant Engineer (AE) on or about 18.4.1977. A request was made to convene Departmental Promotion Committee for filling up the said vacant posts. Some of the promotees, who were either the Graduates in Engineering or were diploma holders in Engineering were working as Section Officers (Grade-I). We would come to their respective dates of appointment a little later, but, at this stage, it may be noticed that in terms of the Recruitment Rules, in order to become eligible for promotion, three years experience for the Graduates in Engineering and eight years experience for the diploma holders in the posts of Section Officer (Grade-I) was necessary. They had been promoted on an ad hoc basis without following the procedure laid down under the Recruitment Rules. On or about 6.3.1979, the Government of Manipur sent a revised proposal for appointment to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil/Mechanical) by promotion on regular basis. However, yet again on 22.6.1981, the Government of Manipur directed the Commission for convening a regular Departmental Promotion Committee for consideration of promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer(Civil/Mechanical) in the following terms : I am directed to send herewith a requisition in the MPSC Form No. 6 duly filled in for convening a regular DPC for consideration of promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil/Mech.). Required ACRs and Integrity certificates in respect of the eligible officers are being sent separately. You are requested kindly to examine the case for convening a DPC at an early date.

Kindly acknowledge the receipt of this letter.

Yours faithfully

Encl : As above

(R. Marulung) Under Secretary to the Govt. of Manipur

6. Respondents were promoted as Assistant Engineers on an ad hoc basis. We may notice that the contesting respondent in SLP(C) No. 16901 of 2006 was promoted as Assistant Engineer on ad hoc basis against a permanen