Hon’ble Vivek Kumar Birla, J.—Heard Sri Siddharth Khare, learned counsel appearing for petitioners and learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents. Pleadings have been exchanged and with consent of learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself.

2. Petitioners, who are working as Seasonal Collection Amin, have come up challenging the order dated 29.5.2014 whereby their claim for promotion to the post of Collection Amin has been rejected.

3. Earlier when their claim for regularization under Rule 5 of the U.P. Collection Amin Service Rules, 1974 was not considered, the petitioners alongwith other persons filed Writ A No. 48283 of 2002 wherein interim order was granted in favour of the petitioners and ultimately the writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 31.3.2014 directing the District Magistrate, Mainpuri to consider the case of the petitioners for regularization in terms of Rules of 1974. Now, by the impugned order dated 29.5.2014 the claim of the petitioner No. 1 Ram Lakhan Pandey has been rejected. The facts mentioned in the impugned order regarding petitioner No. 1 are that petitioner No. 1 stands at Serial No. 17 in the seniority list and his date of birth is 20.1.1958 and on the basis of the same he has crossed 45 years of age on 1.1.2014. His percentage of recovery is 148% but his name stands at serial No. 35 in the order of percentage of recovery and therefore, he cannot be considered for regularization. Regarding petitioner No. 2 Rajesh Chauhan it has been mentioned that his name stands at serial No. 02/32 in the seniority list of Seasonal Collection Amin and his date of birth is 1.10.1955. He has also crossed 45 years of age on 1.1.2014. His percentage of recovery is 119% and his name stands at serial No. 49 in the order of percentage of recovery and therefore, he is also not eligible for regularization.

4. In the counter-affidavit a stand has been taken that since names of the petitioners stand lower in merit in so far as in order of percentage of recovery, therefore, they have rightly not been found eligible for regularization. However, this fact is admitted that the average collection for last two Fasli years is above 70% and as such they were otherwise eligible for the purpose of regularization. The only ground taken is that since their seniority in the order of percentage of recovery was lower, therefore, they were not found eligible for regularization.

5. For ready reference Rule 5 (1) and Rule 17 of the Rules of 1974 are quoted as under:

“5. Source of recruitment.—(1) Recruitment to posts in the ordinary grade of the service shall be made on the result of a competitive examination as provided in Part V of these rules:

Provided that subject to availability of suitable candidates, up to fifteen percent of the vacancies shall be filled by promotion from amongst such substantively appointed collection peons :

(a) who have passed at least High School Examination of the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, Uttar Pradesh or an Examination recognized by the Government as equivalent thereto; and

(b) who have worked in the Collection Organization of the Revenue Department for a period of at least six Fasals:

Provided further that thirty-five per cent vacancies shall be filled by selection from amongst such Seasonal Collection Amins-

(a) who have worked satisfactorily for at least four fasals:

(b) whose age on the first day of July of the year in which selection is made does not exceed 45 years:

Provided also that if suitable candidates are not available, remaining vacancies shall be filled by general candidates through direct recruitment.

Explanation.—Satisfactory work shall mean at least seventy per cent realisation as per prescribed standard during the last four Fasals including good conduct throughout.

17-A. Procedure for selection of Seasonal Collection Amins.—The Collector shall prepare a list of seasonal Collection Amins who