The presence of another judge with equal say strengthens the rigor of the judicial scrutiny and cannot be undermined. The formation of a tentative opinion at the stage of considering interim relief should not be construed as a pre-disposition of mind.

S. Ravindra Bhat, J.

1. This order will dispose off the contentions urged in W.P.(C) 4228/2014 and W.P.(C) 4245/2014. The issue is whether this Bench should not hear the said Writ Petitions. The writ petitioners, in identically worded affidavits dated 11.03.2015, urge that the present Bench should not hear this petition and connected cases since the earlier Bench comprising of one of us (i.e. S. Ravindra Bhat, J) and Vipin Sanghi, J (who is not part of the Bench) had, "already prejudged and predetermined the issues involved while passing the order dated 03.12.2014." This request - to recuse the Bench comprising of one of the members of the said Bench (S. Ravindra Bhat, J - hereafter “the Presiding Judge”) was first voiced on 04.02.2015. The Court had then granted time to the petitioners to file affidavits, which they subsequently did.

2. Firstly, the brief facts are that the writ petition and other connected petitions – (W.P.(C) 4103/2014 and the others) were preferred by the petitioners - identically situated as the petitioners - (in W.P.(C) 4228/2014 and W.P.(C) 4245/2014) wherein they were aggrieved by the final order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) dated 04.04.2014 in O.A. No.2915/2010 (hereafter referred to as "the CAT's impugned order"). Whilst first issuing notice on 08.07.2014 in the writ petition, the then Bench of Gita Mittal, J and Deepa Sharma, J had directed maintenance of status quo. Subsequently on 16.10.2014, the matter was listed before the Bench of Bhat, J and Vipin Sanghi, J. They directed it to be listed on 03.12.2014. On the latter date, Rule was issued in all connected matters (W.P.(C) 4103/2014, 4228/2014, 4245/2014 & 7166/2014. All the petitioners aggrieved by the CAT's common order, had urged that initial interim order granted by the Court should be continued and that the Court should suspend operation of the CAT's impugned order since it had "serious ramifications on their careers". The Court's order dealt with the said applications, C.M. Nos. 16835, 16824, 8491 & 8553/2014. According to the petitioners, the CAT's order was erroneous because it assumed that the AIIMS Recruitment Rules, 1981 had statutory basis. It was also urged that the Assessment Promotion Scheme (APS) framed in 1992 was extended to enable promotion as Professors on assessment basis in 2000. The petitioners had been promoted as Professors. Consequently, they claimed to be lawfully entitled to seniority over later direct recruits. The petitioners also relied upon two decisions of the Supreme Court to say that under similar circumstances, officials promoted under similar schemes constituted temporary additions to the cadre and entitled to due seniority. The order - after discussing the CAT’s impugned order - went on to discuss the submissions made in the following terms:

"7. This Court has considered the submissions. To take up the last issue adjudicated right away, even if one assumes that both sets of Rules, i.e.1981 Rules and the APS to be mere executive instructions, two facts cannot be disputed. Before 2000, and until even after 2000, the manner in which the sanctioned posts of Professors could, and were filled through, was by direct recruitment. That is the only mode prescribed in the 1981 Rules, and there is no other norm. The 1981 Rules contained the policy of the AIIMS and was binding as executive instructions. The APS, which existed by virtue of its introduction in 1992, was not applicable for Professors; it was extended to them only in 2000.

8. Prima facie, the APS does not alter the 1981 Rules insofar as it prescribes that the method of recruitment to the sanctioned posts of Professor can be filled only by direct recruitment. Clause (iii) of the APS states as follows:

"(iii) 50% of the eligible Additional Professors with seven years of regular service in the grade of Additional Professors may be promoted as Professor each year without linkage to the vacancies in the grade of Professors, on the following t