Heard Mr. I. Longjem, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Sema, learned Addl. Advocate General, Nagaland as well as Mr. R. Iralu, learned Sr. counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 15. The remaining respondents did not enter appearance despite service of notice.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioners, two in number, who are officiating in the post of General Manager/ Deputy Director under the Directorate of Industries and Commerce, Nagaland, inter -alia, challenging the validity of the final seniority list dated 26-07-2011 in so far as the grade of Functional Manager/ Assistant Director is concerned and also the notification dated 19-08-2011 by means of which the respondent No. 3 to 13 have been given officiating promotion to the post of Deputy Director/ General Manager under the Directorate of Industries, Nagaland.

3. The case of the petitioners, in brief, is that by the notification dated 19-12-1988 issued by the Under Secretary, Nagaland Public Service Commission (NPSC), Kohima, recommendations were made in favour of 8 (eight) numbers of candidates for appointment against the vacant posts of Inspector of Industries/ Extension Officer (Class-III non-gazetted) under the Industries and Commerce Department, Govt. of Nagaland. Pursuant to the said recommendation, the Director of Industries, Kohima, Nagaland had issued order dated 19-04-1989 appointing all the eight candidates including the petitioners. In the aforesaid list dated 19-12-1988 the respondent No. 7, 13 and one Smti. Anjali G. Kachari were placed above the petitioners in the order of merit whereas the respondent No. 6 and 12 had been shown below the petitioners.

4. Thereafter, by issuing the notification dated 19-07-1996 the Joint Director of Industries (Administration), Nagaland had published the final seniority list of the Extension Officers/ Inspector of Industries as on 18-07-1996. In the said list the names of the petitioner No. 1 and 2 appeared in Sl. No. 8 and 9 respectively whereas the name of the respondent No. 12 appeared at Sl. No. 10. In the seniority list dated 19-17-1996 the name of the respondent No. 6 did not even figure.

5. It is the admitted case of the petitioners that as per date of joining in service the respondent No. 3, 4, 5, 7 and 13 are senior to both the petitioners herein. However, the petitioners have firmly contended that the respondent Nos. 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 14 are all juniors to both the petitioner No. 1 and 2 whereas the respondent No. 15 is junior to petitioner No. 1 but senior to petitioner No. 2. Notwithstanding the same, the names of the said respondents have been shown at a higher position in the impugned seniority list.

6. In support of the aforesaid claim, the petitioners have further stated that the respondent No. 6 was placed below the petitioners in the order dated 19-12-1988 issued by the NPSC as well as the appointment order dated 19-04-1989 prepared in order of merit. Yet, the said respondent No. 6 has been shown to be senior to the petitioners in the impugned seniority list. The respondent No. 8 had been initially brought to the Department of Industries for a period of two years on deputation basis vide order dated 31-05-1988 but thereafter he was absorbed in the post of Inspector of Industries on regular basis w.e.f. 21-11-1990 by issuing Government Order dated 12-12-1990 in contravention of the relevant rules. In the said order it was also mentioned that the seniority of the respondent No. 8 in the cadre will be counted from the date of absorption under the Department that is w.e.f. 21-11-1990. Even assuming that his appointment was valid in the eye of law, since the petitioners were appointed before 21-11-1990 in the grade of Inspector/ Extension Officer, hence, the respondent No. 8 could not have been shown to be senior to the petitioners. The respondent No 12 is also evidently junior to the petitioners in the grade of Inspector/ Extension Officers. Desp