The amended corrigendum dated 27.3.2006, which provided for higher seniority to those who passed the trade test, was the central legal principle influencing the court's decision.

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. In challenge is the judgment and order dated 23.5.2008 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur (for short herein referred to as 'the Tribunal') in O.A. No.116/2007 whereby the writ petitioners' assailment of the communication no.10210/HS/778/EIC 2 dated 21.5.2007 circulating amongst others panel of FGM, HS-I and HS-II (category of placement of Master Craftsman) had been negatived. Essentially thereby, the DB Civil Writ Petition No.7395/2008 Chand Mohammed & Anr. v. Central Admn. Tribunal, Jodhpur & Ors. writ petitioners perceived claim of seniority in Highly Skilled category (for short herein referred to as 'HS') in terms of the policy of restructuring engrafted in the letter dated 20.5.2003 (Annex.P/3) was declined.

3. The facts in brief necessary for the disposal of the instant petition are that the petitioners entered the service under the respondents as skilled workman on 18.1.1978 and 6.8.1971 respectively and were recruited as HS-II on 22.3.1995. While they continued to serve as such, the policy aforementioned for restructuring the cadre of artisans staff in the defence establishment was enforced. Paragraph no.3 which has a vital bearing on the issues to be adjudicated deserves to be extracted and is reproduced herein below:-

"3(a) Wherever the grade structure in the Industrial as well as in the Non-Industrial trades is already existing in the ratio of 65:20:15, in the erstwhile Skilled : HS-II : HS-I, the merger of HS-II and HS-I shall be treated to have come into effect from 1.1.96 and the grade structure of Skilled and Highly Skilled categories shall be in the ratio of 65:35 (20+15).

(b) The post of Master Craftsman shall not be part of the hierarchy and the placement in this grade will not be treated as promotion for Highly Skilled Grade either under normal promotion rules or under ACP Scheme.

(c) The selection from Highly Skilled grade to the grade of the Master Craftsman shall be 10% of Highly Skilled Cadre (i.e. 10% of 35% of the total) and the placement in this grade shall be w.e.f. 1.1.96 and upto the date of the issue of these orders.

(d) The placement of the individuals in the posts resulting from the restructuring and ratio revision, shall be made w.e.f. 1.1.96, in relaxation of the conditions, if any, i.e. trade test etc., as one time measure.

(e) The above provision may also be made applicable, as a special case, in relaxation of the existing rules / instructions to the employees who have either retired or died after 1.1.96."

4. Thereunder, the existing grade structure in the Industrial as well as in the Non-Industrial categories in the ratio of 65:20:15, in the Skilled : HS-II : HS-I, was modified to the ratio of 65:35 corresponding to Skilled and Highly Skilled categories. Thereby HS-II and HS-I were merged w.e.f. 1.1.1996 into Highly Skilled class. Paragraph 3(c) prescribed that the selection from Highly Skilled grade following the merger to the grade of the Master Craftsman would be limited to 10% of Highly Skilled Cadre with the placement therein w.e.f. 1.1.96 and upto the date of the issue of the order carrying the policy. Paragraph 3(d) provided that the placement of the individuals following the merger and restructuring in the respective posts would be effective from 1.1.96, in relaxation of the condition, if any, of passing the trade test etc., as a one time measure.

5. According to the petitioners, in terms of these prescriptions of the policy, though they had not passed the trade test, they were entitled to be placed en-bloc along with the others at par with effect from 1.1.1996 above those who were junior to them in HS-II cadre irrespective of the fact that they had passed the trade test. As a matter of fact, the respondents, acting on their own interpretation of the policy, drew a combined seniority list of HS-I and HS-II incumbents on 2.4.2004 to be replaced on 17.5.2004, which according to the petitioners reflected t