P.B. Bajanthri, J.

1. In the instant writ petition, the petitioners have assailed the order dated 22.07.2014 passed by the first respondent (Annexure P/4) by which respondent no.3 is promoted to the post of Superintendent Grade-II and further prayed for consideration of the petitioners' claim to the post of Superintendent Grade-II w.e.f. the date third respondent was promoted with all consequential reliefs such as seniority, further promotion along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum.

2. All the petitioners are working as Senior Assistants in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as “High Court”).

3. The third respondent initially appointed as a Driver on 18.03.1991 in the High Court. He was attached with the then Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.K. Kapoor, Hon'ble Mr. Justice G.S. Singhvi and thereafter in the year 2005, his services were attached with the then Hon'ble Chief Justice. The then Hon'ble Chief Justice while invoking Rule 38 of High Court Establishment (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “Rules 1973”), appointed the third respondent to the post of Assistant in the High Court while relaxing rule 16(i) of Rules 1973 and re-designated as an Assistant Protocol Officer attached to the Chief Justice's office on 20.12.2010 (Annexure P/3), which is in pursuant to the decision dated 09.12.2010 of the Protocol Committee. Subsequently, the post of Assistant was equated to that of Senior Assistant. Thus, the third respondent has entered into the cadre of Senior Assistant.

4. Respondent no.1 notified the seniority list of Senior Assistants as on 21.07.2014 in which petitioners' name are at Sr. Nos. 11, 14, 26, 30, 36, 45, 54, 58, 66, 69, 75, 109, 114, 125, 132, 147, 155 and 157 respectively, whereas the third respondent's name is reflected at Sr. No. 172.

5. The then Hon'ble Chief Justice promoted the third respondent as a Superintendent Grade-II with immediate effect by relaxing all the rules to the post of Superintendent Grade-II and was re-designated as Protocol Officer to the Hon'ble Chief Justice. Consequently, a formal order was passed while ordering so it was ordered that third respondent would be adjusted against the post reserved vide order dated 30.05.2014 for Smt. Sunayana Jain, Senior Assistant, who is facing disciplinary proceedings by de-reserving the above said post for the time being. Thereafter, 1st respondent passed a formal office order dated 22.07.2014 in promoting the third respondent to the post of Superintendent Grade-II in the pay band of Rs.10300-34800/- plus Rs.4800/- grade pay from officiating Senior Assistant to officiating Superintendent Grade-II against a vacant post and re-designated as Protocol Officer to Hon'ble the Chief Justice (Annexure P/4).

6. The petitioners' counsel submitted that under Right to Information Act, the petitioners have obtained proceedings like Annexures P/4 and P/5 relates to the various proceedings of third respondent's promotion as well as rejection of representation by three Joint Registrars dated 08.08.2014 seeking certain service benefits on par with one Sh. Sham Lal Sharma, Joint Registrar. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that promotion of the third respondent to the post of Superintendent Grade-II is contrary to rules of recruitment governing the post. In this regard, he has pointed out that there is violation of rule 12 of Rules 1973 which relates to the post of Superintendent Grade-II, contending that Superintendent Grade-II shall be filled by promotion on the basis of seniority-cum-merit from out of the Senior Assistants having experience of minimum period of three years and there is also violation of Rule 30 of Rules 1973 relates to seniority. It was further submitted that as per the seniority list of Senior Assistants, third respondent is at Sr. No. 172, whereas all the petitioners are seniors to the third respondent. Therefore, there is clear violation of Ru