Both these writ petitions concern the same issues and therefore they are disposed of by a common judgment. Both petitioners were working as Assistant Devaswom Commissioners at the time of filing of the writ petitions. The reliefs sought for is to quash the order by which respondents 3 and 4 are assigned seniority over the petitioners. The said order is produced as Ext.P12 in Writ Petition No.21062/2007 and Ext.P10 in the other writ petition.

2. The relevant facts in relation to Writ Petition No.21062/2007 are the following: The petitioner entered service as L.D. Clerk pursuant to Ext.P1 appointment order dated 27.1981. The next promotion is to the post of U.D.Clerk. The same depends upon passing Devaswom Officers Test and Account Test (Lower). The petitioner passed Devaswom Officers Test on 10.2.1983 and Account Test (Lower) on 5.1984.

3. The petitioner in Writ Petition No.34409/2007 entered service as a Lower Division Clerk on 210.1978 as evidenced by the appointment order Ext.P1. He has got SSLC and has passed Account Test (Lower) and Devaswom Officers Test in June, 1982 and 8.5.1984 respectively.

4. Both the petitioners were promoted as U.D. Clerks as per order dated 9.2004 (Ext.P5 in Writ Petition No.21062/07). Respondents 3 and 4 herein are juniors to the petitioners in service. The third respondent entered service as L.D. Clerk on 30.7.1981. He passed Account Test (Lower) on 10.1983 and the Devaswom Officers Test on 6.1984. He was promoted to the cadre of U.D. Clerk on 19.1984. The fourth respondent entered service as L.D. Clerk on 11.1981 and was relieved on 10.12.1981 for want of vacancy. Later, he was reappointed and joined duty on 7.6.1982. His probation in the cadre of L.D. Clerk was declared on 15.1983. He acquired Account Test (Lower) and Devaswom Officers Test only on 19.1983 and 6.1984 respectively.

5. The petitioners were promoted as Head Clerk with effect from 7.3.1986 and 12.1985 respectively. They were further promoted as Junior Superintendent as per order dated 111.1989 and 35.1989 respectively. They were promoted as Asst. Devaswom Commissioner as per orders dated 17.2.1993 and 20.6.1991 respectively.

6. Thethird respondent was promoted as Head Clerk on 2.1987 and Junior Superintendent and Asst. Devaswom Commissioner on 8.1990 and 10.1995 respectively. The 4th respondent was promoted as Head Clerk on 9.1987, Junior Superintendent on 10.1990 and Asst. Commissioner 10.1995 respectively.

7. The Devaswom Board had framed rules for fixation of seniority and promotion as empowered under Section 35 of the Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950 which was brought into force as per the Gazette Notification dated 212.1979. This is produced as Ext.P3. The said rules superseded the provisions of the Devaswom Manual. Rule 9 of the said Rules concerns promotion and Rule 8 concerns seniority. Rule 9 (3) provides that "Promotions in a service, or class which depends upon passing of any examination, whether general or departmental, shall ordinarily be made with reference to the condition existing at the time of occurrence of the vacancies and not with reference to those at the time when the question of promotion is taken up."

8. After respondents 3 and 4 were promoted as Junior Superintendents, they filed representations before the Devaswom Board complaining that the principles under Rule 28(bbb) of KS & SSR should be applied to their promotion to the post of U.D. Clerk. They also contended that there were 18 vacancies at that point of time but only 16 persons were considered while considering the eligibility of the persons for promotion. According to them, when the day following the last date of the examination is taken, they have acquired the test qualification prior to the petitioners, going by the amended Rules 28(bbb) of KS & SSR.

9. In Writ Petition No.21062/2007, Ext.P9 dated 38.1994 is the memo issued to the petitioner seeking his objection to the matter and he submitted Ext.P10 expla