JUDGMENT :

R. Mukhopadhyay, J.

Heard Mr. Sanjay Piprawall, learned counsel for the appellant in L.P.A. No. 82 of 2021, Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, learned Advocate General for the appellants in L.P.A. No. 85 of 2021 and Mr. Anupam Lal Das, assisted by Mr. Saurav Shekhar, learned counsels appearing for the respondent nos. 1 and 2 in both the appeals.

2. Since in both these appeals the appellants are aggrieved by the order dated 21.01.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S). No. 53 of 2020 the same are being disposed of by this common order.

3. The appellants have challenged the order dated 21.01.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S). No. 53 of 2020 by virtue of which Advertisement No. 05/2019 which was impugned to the writ application has been set aside and the retrospective application of 10 % Economically Weaker Section quota was held to be against Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently the State Government was directed to modify Advertisement No. 05/2019 to the extent that 10 % quota for Economically Weaker Section shall not be made effective retrospectively for the vacancy of the years 2013 and 2015. The appellants are also aggrieved by the direction of the learned Single Judge to the effect that the vacancies of 2013 and 2015 should be filled up in terms of the rules existing at that point of time.

4. The writ petitioners (respondent nos. 1 and 2 herein) had preferred W.P.(S). No. 53 of 2020 incorporating the following prayers:

(a) For issuance of appropriate Writ(s), Order(s), Direction(s) specifically a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the Advertisement No. 05 of 2019 published by the respondent no. 7 to the extent so far as it relates to the appointments to be made on the posts of Assistant Engineer (Civil), challenge limited to the extent of retrospective applicability of 10 % Economically Weaker Section reservation which accounts for 52 posts in the current advertisement for all departments in view of the fact that EWS is introduced under Government resolution dated 25.02.2019 and 08.07.2019 but not retrospectively; but respondents by merging and clubbing earlier vacancies that arose in the year 2013 and 2015 advertised vide Advertisement No. 06 of 2015 along with individual, separate and current vacancies of the year 2019 and applying 10 % EWS quota on all the clubbed posts, have given retrospective effect to the provisions of EWS quota published vide resolution dated 25.02.2019 and 08.07.2019.

(b) For appropriate Writ(s), Order(s), Direction(s) specifically a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the decision to conduct single selection process on the vacancies of the year 2013 and 2015 earlier advertisement (Advertisement No. 06/2015), and to that extent (Advertisement No. 05/2019), so far as it relates to the merger of the vacancies in the current advertisement of the year 2019 is being challenged.

(c) For issuance of appropriate Writ(s), Order(s), Direction(s) specifically a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondent-authorities to conduct selection process on the vacancies arrived in the year 2013, 2015 and 2019 separately and independently on the basis of applicable rules, regulations and eligibility of the particular years respectively without merging the vacancies; since, the merger would result in the candidates who were ineligible to participate in the appointment process for the vacancies of the year 2013/2015 respectively on account of their lesser age in eligibility becoming eligible in the year 2019 for the same seats due to the merger of those earlier seats along with current vacancies of the year 2019 in Advertisement No. 05/2019 and conducting single selection process thereby encroaching upon the right of fair competition of eligible candidates of the years 2013 and 2015.

5. Shorn of the details the factual matrix reveals that the writ petitioners are already working on the post of Junior Engineers in the Road Construction