Ad-hoc service can only be counted from the date of regular appointment in accordance with the relevant rules, as established by legal provisions and precedents.

( 1 ) LEARNED Counsels, appearing for the parties submit that all the Writ Petitions are based on similar facts giving rise to common question of law and hence all of them may be heard together and decided by a common judgment.

( 2 ) INDIVIDUALS, were impleaded as Respondent Nos. 4 to 24 in the Writ Petition under Court order dated 23. 10. 2002 on the Civil Misc. Application No. 138538 of 2002. No request made on behalf of the petitioners to serve them and instead desired these petitions to be decided finally as such.

( 3 ) LEARNED Counsels for the parties submit that there is no dispute on facts. The sole question to be decided in the petitions is whether petitioners can claim for counting period of ad-hoc service, rendered on the basis of ad-hoc promotion before regularisation, while determining inter se seniority?

( 4 ) COMMISSION)PETITIONER appointed as Junior Engineer in of Rural Engineering Service. Petitioners and others promoted on ad-hoc post of Assistant Engineer in the department the leading petition ). Substantive vacancy year in promotional of Assistant Engineer in the department. The U. P. Regularisation on ad-hoc Promotions within the Purview of the Public Service rules, 1988 enforced.

( 5 ) 20. 3. 1991 U. P. Government Service Seniority Rules, 1991 enforced

( 6 ) 17. 6. 1992 ofassistant seniority to belater (Annexure-8

( 7 ) 29. 12. 1992

( 8 ) 10. 2. 1995 the the W. P. (Annexure-2) to the supplementary affidavit. Government Order of regularisation-in favour petitioner, ad-hoc Assistant Engineer as engineer on temporary basis and subject to fixed in the cadre of Assistant Engineers to the W. P.)Fixing Year wise quotadepartment Published Seniority List name of petitioner at Serial No. 82. Annexure-3 to ( 9 ) 14. 12. 2001 Revised Seniority List published afternotice to concerned and invited objections form the concerned Junior engineers in pursuance to the directions given by High court, Lucknow Bench. Name of the petitioner mentioned at Serial No. 210. 5. Reliefs, claimed in the leading petition, are : "reliefs "it is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Honble Court may graciously be pleased to : (i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash impugned seniority list dated 14. 12. 2001, vide Annxure-1 to the writ petition; (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding respondents not to give effect to the aforesaid seniority list; (iii) issue further a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to place the petitioner, in the impugned seniority list at an appropriate place, in adherence to U. P. Government Servants Seniority Rules, 1991 as also the earlier seniority list dated 10. 2. 1995 and the seniority list of Junior Engineers. (iv) issue further a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to promote the petitioner as an Superintending Engineer, under scheduled caste quota, he being the seniormost Executive Engineer under the said quota; (v) issue any other and further writ, order or direction as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper; (vi) award costs to the petitioner. " 6. Petitioner alleges in Para 12 of the leading petition, that "no opportunity of hearing to the petitioner has been given before publishing the impugned seniority list------". It is also contended that their ad-hoc period of service-at least from the departmental promotional quota vacancy year 1982-83 till 17. 6. 1992 (when petitioner was regularised by Selection Committee under regularisation Rules, 1988) cannot be ignored and it must b computed while determining inter se seniority of persons working on the posts of Assistant Engineers. 7. Copy of the objection filed by the Petitioner (and referred in the impugned order) is Annexure 9 to the affidavit, of the petitioner himself in support of Amendment Application No. 138546 of 2002. It may be noted that said Amendment Application was not pre