JUDGMENT

B.P. DAS, J. — The petitioners in this batch of writ petitions challenge the orders passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal dated 17.4.2008 in O.A. No. 904(C) of 2008, dated 1.12.2009 in O.A. No. 306 (C) of 2009, dated 21.4.2008 in O.A. No. 979(C) of 2008 and dated 9.5.2008 in O.A. No. 1097(C) of 2008, vide Annexure-12, and also the resolution of the General Administration Department of the State Government dated 20.3.2002, vide Annexure-5, and the gradation list of the Orissa Administrative Services, Class-I (Junior Branch) (in short “OAS-I (JB)”) dated 3.3.2008, vide Annexure-7. Since common questions of fact and law are involved in the writ petitions, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2.The petitioners were appointed to O.A.S.-II posts being selected by the Orissa Public Service Commission. Some of them were recruited in 1983 and some others in 1984 and 1987. They were assigned different ranks in the merit lists prepared for their respective batches by the OPSC. In the respective merit list, persons belonging to S.C. & S.T. category, who were appointed as against reserved vacancies, were placed much below in the list than the petitioners. Thus, in terms of the merit list/panel, the petitioners were senior to the appointees belonging to S.C. & S.T. category recruited in the same recruitment year. After rendering service in the post of OAS-II, the petitioners having been found suitable by the D.P.C. were promoted and appointed to the next higher rank, i.e., O.A.S.-I (JB) vide Government Notification dated 26.8.2000 (Annexure-2). The petitioners joined the promotional posts and have been continuing as such since then. However, many junior OAS Officers belonging to the SC & ST category recruited along with the petitioners or even in subsequent batches in different recruitment years were also given promotion to the rank of O.A.S.-I (JB) against reserved vacancies in between 1995 and 2000 as per the Orissa Reservation of Vacancies in Posts and Services (for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) Act and the Rules, 1975 and 1976 (in short, “O.R.V. Act & Rules”). It is stated by the petitioners that the promotions made both in favour of reserved categories and unreserved categories including the petitioners have not yet been concurred by the OPSC since the principles determining seniority inter se and the gradation list prepared from time to time of the officers in the rank of O.A.S.-II and O.A.S.-I (JB) became the subject-matter of several protracted litigations. However, the roster point promotees belonging to the SC & ST category were given promotion to the rank of O.A.S.-I (JB) against reserved vacancies earlier irrespective of their original seniority below the general category recruits like the petitioners. But the original seniority position in the cadre of O.A.S.-II prepared by the OPSC was retained in the O.A.S.-I (JB) without any changes on the basis of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India & others v. Virpal Singh Chauhan & others; AIR 1996 S.C. 448. Hence, irrespective of getting promotion in subsequent years, the inter se seniority of the petitioners vis-a-vis the S.C. & S.T. roster point promotees in the rank of O.A.S.-I(JB) was maintained in the seniority/disposition list prepared for the rank of O.A.S.-I(JB) in the year 2002 and also in the year 2004 as per the panel position prepared by the OPSC for the cadre of O.A.S.-II. The copy of the seniority list dated 16.5.2001 of officers of O.A.S.-I (JB) cadre has been filed as Annexure-3. Such seniority list was maintained in view of the ‘Catch Up Rule’ evolved by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Virpal Singh Chauhan (supra), which was also set at rest by the Apex Court in the case of Ajit Singh & others v. The State of Punjab & others, AIR 1999 S.C. 3471 (hereinafter “Ajit Singh Januja-II”). It is stated that Article 16(4A)) was incorporated in the Constitution by way of 77th