The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Corporation erred in determining seniority and promotions by treating the date of confirmation as the basis, ignoring the period of service on temporary/probation, and disregarding relevant circulars issued by the State Government.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, the respondent Corporation and counsel for private respondents and the State.

2. The basis of the entire dispute is a gradation list which was prepared by the Patna Municipal Corporation and is dated 15.12.2001 .This has been brought on record at annexure-3. The respondent Corporation drew up seniority list of Sanitary Supervisor as well as Inoculator for promotion to the post of Sanitary Inspectors. This is a joint gradation list and it is for this gradation list, the Corporation issued an order contained in annexure-2 which is dated 2nd January, 2002. By virtue of this order 13 persons came to be granted promotion on the post of Sanitary Inspector.

3. From a perusal of annexure-3 two things emerge that Corporation in its wisdom decided to treat the date of confirmation or date of regular appointment of the employees in question on the post of Sanitary Supervisors or Inoculators as the base for granting seniority in the said gradation list. The authority also noticed that the post of Sanitary Inspectors in terms of the amended rule of the Corporation could be made available to only such persons who had passed and obtained a certificate of the Sanitary Inspector from the recognised institution in this regard.

4. Based on the decision taken at annexure-3 petitioner Devi Singh was shown at serial no. 19 and Nesar Alam at serial no. 24 in the gradation list. The date of appointment on permanent basis has given as 1.5.1984. 1984, 1978 are the years when they had acquired the certificate of training of Sanitary Inspectors.

5. After the respondents Corporation issued annexure-2 by virtue of which promotions were granted to 13 persons, the respondents vide order dated 25.1.2002 which is annexure-1 reverted the petitioners to the post of Sanitary Supervisor. This was the post on which the petitioners were earlier working but they came to be appointed on the post of Sanitary Inspector after the High Court intervened in the matter and directed the respondents to consider the case of these petitioners in the background that they had been working as Sanitary Inspector for almost 20 years. One of the orders came to be passed in CWJC No. 4239 of 1993 and is dated 26.8.1994. Since nothing came to be done despite the above direction of the Court, a contempt application, bearing MJC No. 2894 of 1995 came to be filed. The matter was taken up and vide order dated 25.4.1997 the contempt was dropped on a categorical assurance given by the Administrator to the Court that order passed by the writ court shall be implemented within a month from today.

6. On the solemn undertaking given, the contempt was dropped. Thereafter, the respondent in compliance of the contempt order issued an order dated 7.1.2000. This is annexure-8 to the writ application. By virtue of this order the petitioner was promoted to the post of Sanitary Inspector in the pay scale of Rs. 1200-30-1800/-. While issuing this order however, the respondent authorities added a rider. The order states that the regular promotion being granted to the petitioners will be subject to final publication of the gradation list to be issued by the Corporation. In case the petitioners did not figure within the zone of consideration this promotion can be withdrawn. The petitioners by virtue of this order joined the post and continued to work as a Sanitary Inspectors till annexure-1 came to be passed on 25.1.2002. By virtue of annexure-1 the petitioners were reverted and despite having worked for two years as Sanitary Inspectors. They have been made junior to persons who were otherwise not eligible or seniority-wise to hold the post of Sanitary Inspector. The petitioners, therefore, have moved this Court again not only challenging the order of reversion contained in annexure-1 but also the order granting promotions to 13 persons which is annexure-2.

7. The gradation list dated 15.12.2001 contained in annexure-3 based on which promotions have been gr