1. These Writ Petitions being connected, they are disposed of by a common Judgment.

2. Petitioner in W.P. (C). No. 2557/07 entered service as a Lower Division Clerk in the Civil Judicial Ministerial Service in the year 1984. Later, she was promoted as U.D. Clerk in the year 1987 and still further as Head Clerk by Order dated 6.3.1998 of the District Judge. Pathanamthitta. By Ex.P1 order dated 16.12.2002, petitioner was promoted as Junior Superintendent. She joined duty as Junior Superintendent on 21.12.2002. Ext. P2 dated 7.2.2006 is issued by the High Court promoting one Shri C.D. Joy, Senior Superintendent as Sheristadar, thus leading to a vacancy in the cadre of Senior Superintendent. Ext. P3 dated 13.2.2006 evidences promotion of the petitioner as Senior Superintendent. The Rules in force at the time of issuance of Ext. P3 order provided that the District be the Unit for purpose of promotion to the post of Senior Superintendent. However, an amendment was effected by Ext.P4 order altering the Unit for the purpose of promotion from the District to the State. Ext.P4 Government Order is dated 21.1.2006, but it is published in the Gazette on 21.2.2006. Petitioner came to be served with Ext. P5 Show Cause Notice. It is, inter alia, stated that promotion to the post of Senior Superintendent after 21.1.2006 was to be made by the High Court based on the State Level Seniority of Junior Superintendents in the Civil Wing including Head Clerks of MACT and Head Clerks of Munsiff-Magistrate Courts (Civil Wing). Petitioner along with three others promoted by District Judges were called upon by the High Court to show cause why their promotion should not he cancelled and they should not he reverted to the category of Junior Superintendent in view of the new Rules. Petitioner submitted Ext.P6 reply. By Ext.P7 Office Memorandum, a draft seniority list of Senior Superintendents of District Courts/Additional District Courts/Special Courts was circulated. Ext.P7(a) is the draft seniority list. Petitioner is shown at the correct serial number, it is stated, but it is stated to be provisional till the matter is decided. Ext.P9(a) is the relevant extract of the final seniority list of Junior Superintendents in the Civil Wing including Head Clerks of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunals and Head Clerks of Munsiff-Magistrate Courts. In the same, petitioner is included at SLNo.17. If Exts.P9 and P9(a) are allowed to stand, it is pointed out that the petitioner will not be entitled to promotion as Senior Superintendent with effect from 13.22006. It is the case of the petitioner that preparation of a State Level final seniority list of Junior Superintendents as on 21.1.2006 was unjustified as though Ext. P4 was issued on 21.1.2006, it was published in the Kerala Gazette dated 21.2 2006 and it came into force only on 21.2.2006. Petitioner challenges Exts.P5, P9 and P9(a) to the extent that Ext.P5 was issued and Exts.P9 and P9(a) are prepared taking 21.1.2006 as the crucial date on the erroneous assumption that Ext.P4 came into force on that day and seeks a writ of certiorari to quash them and also seeks a declaration that Ext.P4 Rules came into force only on 21 22006. The further prayer sought is for a direction to the second respondent not to interfere with the promotion of the petitioner. The last prayer sought is to command the second respondent to give promotion to the petitioner as Senior Superintendent with retrospective effect from the date of occurrence of vacancy with all consequential benefits. The last prayer is apparently based on the case that one Shri C. D. Joy was promoted against a vacancy of Sheristadar which arose in November, 2005. When the vacancy arose in November, 2005, though there was a seniority dispute between Shri C.D. Joy and one Shri Andrew Thomas, it is contended that one would he entitled to be promoted in November. 2005.

3. Petitioners in W.P.(C).No.28205/06 have essentially the same complaint, namely that the Amende