JUDGMENT

Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.

Introduction

1. Five promotee Private Secretaries (`PSs') of this Court have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the High Court and 13 of their colleague PSs who are direct recruits (`DRs') essentially questioning the notification dated 28th March 2009 issued by the High Court that confirms the Petitioners as well as Respondents 2 to 14 as PSs with effect from 20th March 2009. An incidental challenge is laid to the constitutional validity of Rule 5A of the Delhi High Court Staff (Seniority) Rules, 1971 (`Seniority Rules') as well as to an order dated 12th October 2009 whereby the technical resignations tendered by the DR PSs from the previous posts held by them were accepted, treating them as fresh recruits under the 75% DR quota for the post of PSs.

2. The essential grievance of the Petitioners, i.e., the five promotee PSs, is that they should have been confirmed substantively as PSs with effect from 17th February 2007, the date from which they were declared as having satisfactorily completed their probation. This in turn will make them senior to the DR PSs who are Respondents 2 to 14.

3. In the judg