R.M. Savant, J.

Rule, having regard to the challenge raised, made returnable forthwith and heard with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

2. The vexed issue of the seniority between direct recruits and promotees has once again engaged the attention of this Court in the above Writ Petition.

By the above Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India exception is taken to the Final Approved Seniority List of Judicial Officers in the cadre of District Judge (recruited by nomination and promotion in the recruitment process 2007, 2008, 2010 and 2011) dated 11th September 2015. The Petitioners also seek the consequential order/writ or direction to the 1st Respondent to draw the seniority list afresh for each calender year i.e. from the year 2008 onwards in accordance with the applicable rules based on the actual appointment of the Judicial Officers.

3. The factual matrix giving rise to the above Writ Petition can be stated thus :

Background :

The service conditions in the Subordinate Judiciary were the subject matter of the All India Judges' Association's case wherein directions and reliefs were sought in respect of the working and service conditions of the Subordinate Judiciary. The Apex Court vide its judgment and order reported in the matter of All India Judges Association v/s. Union of India, (1992) 1 SCC 119, I issued certain directions which were required to be complied with by the respective States and Union Territories. A Review Petition came to be filed against the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court. Pursuant to the directions issued in the said Review Petition by order dated 21st March 1996, the Central Government constituted the First National Judicial Pay Commission under the Chairmanship of Justice K.J. Shetty which came to be known as the "Shetty Commission". The Shetty Commission carried out its deliberations and submitted its report on 11th November 1999. The Shetty Commission made its recommendations in respect of various issues, however, in the context of the present Writ Petition the interse seniority between the District Judges i.e. between the promotees and direct recruitees is relevant. The issue of method of recruitment to the posts of District Judges from different cadres and the interse seniority to be maintained amongst them came up for consideration before the Apex Court in the third round of litigation i.e. in the case of All India Judges Associations vs. The Union of India III reported in, (2002) 4 SCC 247. The Apex Court considering the recommendations made by the Shetty Commission delivered a judgment which is. In so far as the post of District Judge is concerned, the Apex Court directed that the recruitment to the Higher Judicial Service should be trifurcated. It directed to the following effect :

(a) 25% posts should be filled in by direct recruitment from amongst advocates on the basis of a competitive exam.

(b) 25% posts should be filled in by promotion strictly on the basis of merit through a competitive examination (accelerated promotion) and

(c) 50% posts should be filed in by promotion from amongst the Civil Judges (Senior Division) on the basis of merit-cum-seniority.

The Apex Court in the said case noted that there has been a constant discontentment amongst the members of the Higher Judicial Service in regard to their seniority in service. The Apex Court took the note of the fact that large number of cases are filed in order to decide the relative seniority interse between various officers recruited from different cadres to the post of District Judge. The Apex Court held that in order to mitigate such interse seniority issues, it would be best if a roster system is followed. The Apex Court was of the view that a 40point roster system as followed by the Central Government and as approved by the Apex Court in the case of R.K. Sabharwal vs State of Pun