S. Ravindra Bhat, J.

1. In the present writ petition, the seniority list of Assistant Commandants in the Sashastra Seema Bal (the respondent), issued on 25.11.2011 has been challenged.

2. The Special Service Bureau [now Sashastra Seema Bal or “SSB”] was set up in the year 1963 under the Cabinet Secretariat. In January 2001, the Administrative Control of the Force was transferred from the Cabinet Secretariat, to the Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). The Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) Rules, 1955 as amended from time to time were applicable to Battalions of SSB. Since the CRPF Act and Rules were applicable to SSB since inception, the post of Assistant Commandant was filled up in accordance with Rule 105 of CRPF Rules, 1955 i.e. by promotion, by direct recruitment and by deputation without any fixed percentage. From 6th November, 1986, the method of recruitment for the post of Assistant Commandant was subsequently amended in Rule 105 of CRPF Rule vide MHA notification by which appointment was to be i) By Direct recruitment: 50% ii) By promotion: 50% iii) Shortfall in direct recruitment or recruitment by promotion in the rank of Dy. SP (Coy Commander) could be filled by deputation or re-employment as classified in the rules. On 20.11.1996, the Cabinet Secretariat sought MHA’s clarification with respect to norms for fixing inter se seniority as between direct recruits and promotees in the light of representations of 1987 and 1989 direct recruit Asst. Commandants.

3. All the petitioners joined the SSB after successfully competing for the post of Asst. Commandant, in the direct recruitment quota; they reported for training after having been required to do so, before 30th November, 1993. Since at that time, the SSB did not have its academy, they were sent for training to the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) academy at Hyderabad. Upon completion of training, the petitioners were asked to join the SSB units and later were posted at different places. They aver that in seniority lists published after their recruitment and appointment, the SSB placed them in positions having regard to their comparative merit, based on performance in the written test and interview marks secured by them in the recruitment process held by the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC). The petitioners submit that this was evident from the seniority lists published 30.03.1995 (which placed them at Sl. Nos. 127, 129 and 134 respectively) and 17.04.2000 (which placed them at Sl. Nos. 57, 58 and 60 respectively). They compare this with certain others- notably with the eleventh respondent who was shown as junior to the third respondent. The petitioners were subsequently promoted as Dy. Commandants (in 2004) and as Second in Command (2IC) on 01.04.2007. They were subsequently promoted to the cadre of Commandants, in November, 2009.

4. The petition alludes to an office memorandum (OM) dated 30.09.2002, which is in turn referred to by three other memoranda. These clarified that while fixing inter se seniority of direct recruits in SSB, the marks obtained by them in the direct recruitment test, the foundation course and basic professional courses had to be given weightage of 50%; 10% and 40% respectively. It is stated that, later, on 25.11.2002, the Central Government clarified that all CRPF Rules would be made applicable to the combatized units of the SSB. On 10.06.2003, Rules regulating the method of recruitment to the post of Assistant Commandant Group “A” (GD) in the Special Service Bureau were brought in force. Rule 8(3)(ii) of the Rules read as follows:-

“(ii) Inter se seniority of direct recruits shall be determined by adding together the marks obtained by them in recruitment tests, the Foundation Course, and the Basic Professional Courses in the ratio of 50:10:40”

This basis was later changed (on 23.07.2010) whereby equal weightage (50% each, by way of 100 marks each) was to be given for marks obtained in the UPSC selection and the basic foundat