( 1 ) THE grievance of the petitioners, to put in a nut shell, is this: the District and Sessions Judge, East godavari District filled up several posts in the cadre of LDC during the period from 1-10-1979 to 9-3-1983 without maintaining 3:1 ratio stipulated in Rule 9 (2) of the a. P. Judicial Ministerial Service Rules (the rules, for brevity) and in the process many of them who ought to have been juniors to the petitioners in the cadre of LDC have become seniors to them.

( 2 ) THIS case has a chequered career in terms of litigative processes. We do not think it necessary to refer to the entire history of the case. Suffice it to state that the petitioners filed WP No. 5142 of 1989 in this Court seeking a direction to the learned district Judge to refix their seniority by maintaining 3:1 ratio as stipulated in rule 9 (2) of the Rules with effect from the date of passing of Group II examination on 18-1-1981 and consequential benefits of promotion etc. That writ petition was disposed of by this Court on 25-3-1996 directing the learned District Judge to consider the case of the petitioners on the basis of the earlier representations said to have been made by them after g