DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, J.

1. Leave granted in SLP (C) No. 6878 af 2002.

2: What is challenged in these appeals is the judgment and order of the Division Bench of Delhi High Court whereby the appeals filed against the order of the Learned Singh Judge in two. Writ Petitions were allowed.

3. The grievance of the appellants as was raised in the Writ Petitions, in nutshell, is as fallows:-

Shri Rajendera Singh Lamba and V.K. Garg, appellants herein were appointed as Lower Division Clerks (far shart LDC) an 01.10.1972 and 24.11.1969 respectively, in the Ministerial Establishment of the District & Sessions Judge, Delhi. During their employment they completed their graduation from Delhi University in the year 1975 and 1974 respectively. Shri Rajinderpal Singh Lamba and V. K. Garg an 24.12.1986 and 02.01.1987 respectively submitted their applications to the District & Sessions Judge, Delhi seeking promotion to the posts of Upper Division Clerk (for short UDC). The said applications were made seeking benefit of Rule VI, Chapter 18-A, High Court Rules and Orders, Vol. 1 framed under Section 35(3) of the Punjab Courts Act, 1918. The said Rule reads as under:-

"Promotion- (1) Appointments to the higher grades of the ministerial establishment should ordinarily be made by seniority from lower grades, provided that the official who would thus receive promotion possesses the prescribed educational qualifications and is otherwise fit to perform the duties to which he will be promoted; for which purpose tests may be imposed. This rule does not apply to such posts as that of stenographer; for which special qualifications are needed; but preference should be given to officers with such qualifications who are already working in the lower grades;

Provided that permanent vacancies in the 75-5-125 grade shall be filled by the District & Sessions Judges in the following rotation:-

(i) By selection on merit out of graduates who have atheist two years experience in the work of the office, if there is no suitable graduate who fulfills this condition an outsider graduate may be appointed, but he must be one who normally resides within the jurisdiction of the District & Sessions Judge.

(ii) & (iii) By normal promotion in the office, Le., the appointment of the next senior man whether graduate or non- graduate subject to his fitness:

Provided further that the rotation may be modified in very exceptional cases when the direct appointment of a graduate would mean the ousting of a man, who had been officiating quasi-permanently in the post concerned for an appreciable period. What is on appreciable period will depend on the circumstances of each case. After such a modification, the rotation should be restored as soon as possible.

(2) In making promotions preference may invariably be shown to officials who are known to be strictly honest. No promotion should be given and no recommendation for promotion made in the case of an official who does not possess and maintain a reputation for strict integrity. Efficiency without honesty is not to be regarded as constituting a claim to promotion."

The appellants were seeking their promotion w.e.f. 1975, as according to them permanent vacancies in the cadre of UDC have occurred in the year 1975.

The said applications were rejected by the District and Sessions Judge, Delhi. Aggrieved by the said rejection the appellants filed service appeals in the Administrative side of Delhi High Court. By communication dated 02.03.1988, the service appeals were allowed, but to the extent that the appellants are entitled to be considered for promotion to the grade of UDC. and that the promotion, if any, will be prospective only.

The appellants still aggrieved, as the promotion and other service benefits were not granted with retrospective effect, approached the Delhi High Court, on Judicial Side, by filing two separate writ petitions.

4. In the meantime acting upon the abovementioned communication dated 02.03.1988 the appellants viz. V.K. Garg and Raji