ORDER : A.S. Qureshi, J. The petitioners herein were the postmen working at Ahmedabad who had passed their departmental examination, but as there were not enough vacancies available, they were offered promotion if they agreed to go outside Ahmedabad. The petitioners accepted promotion at Baroda. They had also signed a declaration while accepting promotion at Baroda that they will not be entitled to be brought back to Ahmedabad. Subsequently however the Posts and Telegraphs Department changed its policy on the question of allowing repatriation, of the persons who had taken promotion outside provided that they had completed five years' service at the places where they went out on promotion. The petitioners having completed five years at Baroda applied in the year 1980 for transfer back to Ahmedabad as their families were at Ahmedabad and that under the revised policy they were entitled to seek such a transfer. 2. The Department did not grant the requests of the petitioners on the ground that there were not enough promotional posts available at Ahmedabad to which the petitioners could be repatriated. There is a quota fixed for the departmental promotees and the direct recruits in the ratio of 50: 50. It appears from the record that there were 42 vacancies in the year 1979 for the departmental candidates which were all filled up. Similarly in the year 1980, there were 9 posts which were also filled up. But in the year 1981, there were 38 posts for the departmental candidates, of which, only 22 posts were filled in and 16 had remained unfilled. Similarly in the year 1982 also, all the vacancies for the departmental candidates were not filled up. Mr. S. D. Shah, the learned counsel for the respondents states that the posts allocated to the departmental candidates which remained unfilled in any particular year on account of nonavailability of the candidates, they were carried over to the subsequent years and hence there must be at present on accumulated number of carried over posts which were meant for the departmental candidates should be available for allocation. But Mr. Shah also states that there is no vacancy at present from among posts allocated for the departmental candidates. When pressed to explain this contradictory situation, Mr. Shah has. But Mr. Shah also states that there is no vacancy at present from among posts allocated for the departmental candidates. When pressed to explain this contradictory situation, Mr. Shah has. on instructions stated that the vacancies in the posts allocated for the departmental candidates which remained unfilled on account of non-availability of the qualified candidates were filled in from amongst the direct recruits. Thus, there is an admission on the part of the Department that the ratio of 50: 50 for the direct recruits and for the departmental promotees has not been strictly followed and that there have been appointments of direct recruits in excess of the quota allotted to them at the cost of quota allotted to the departmental candidates. This is not proper on the part of the Department to upset the ratio set by it of 50: 50 for the direct recruits and for the departmental candidates. The proper thing would have been that the unfilled posts for the departmental candidates should have been carried over so that in the subsequent year a larger number of departmental candidates would have chance to get promotion from postmen to clerks. Mr. Shah admits this position and states that the Department is agreeable to set right the imbalance caused on account of taking larger number of direct recruits at the cost of departmental candidates. The respondents have to be directed to take necessary steps to see that the injustice done to the departmental candidates is set right in near future by taking larger number of departmental candidates than their allocated 50% quota so as to fill the deficit which occurred in the past few years. 3. As regards the petitioners and other persons who have sought repatriation to the places where they were before they went out to take promotion, it seems that their requests are dealt with under Rule 38 of Posts and Telegraphs Manual Volume IV. The transfers under Rule 38 are of various kinds including mutual transfers, transfers on humanitarian grounds, transfer back to the place from where a postman had agreed to go to outside place on promotion as a clerk. The transfers under Rule 38 are of various kinds including mutual transfers, transfers on humanitarian grounds, transfer back to the place from where a postman had agreed to go to outside place on promotion as a clerk. There is no fixed ratio or percentage allocated to the persons who seek transfer on the ground that they had opted to go out to obtain promotion from the postmen to clerks and having served for five years and more at the place, were entitled to be transferred back to their original place before promotion. Mr. B. P. Tanna, the learned counsel for the petitioners has urged that the petitioners are entitled to the benefit of the new liberalised policy of allowing transfers to those persons who had opted to go out on promotion from postmen to clerks on completion of five years at the place of promotion. Mr. Tanna has further urged that the petitioners had completed 5 years before 1980 and that they had applied in the year 1980 for transfer back from Baroda to Ahmedabad. But their request for transfer has not been acceded on the ground that there are no vacancies available at Ahmedabad. Mr. Tanna points out that there have been vacancies in the years 1981 and 1982 for the departmental candidates which had remained unfilled at Ahmedabad and yet the petitioners were not transferred to Ahmedabad. Mr. Tanna has also pointed out that in the year 1983 only one person was given transfer to Ahmedabad, although there were many posts available to be filled in by the departmental candidates. In their affidavit in reply to the rejoinder, the respondents have stated that on its register, the department had 60 applications for such transfers of whom 16 candidates are approved by the Post Master General for transfer to Ahmedabad Division and they are already transferred. According to the respondents, the petitioners are eligible for transfer back to Ahmedabad, but they have to take their turn as those who are on the list for transfer are being transferred. The grievance made by Mr. Tanna is that there is no fixed quota or percentage set apart for the petitioners and others who seek repatriation to their original posting at Ahmedabad. Mr. The grievance made by Mr. Tanna is that there is no fixed quota or percentage set apart for the petitioners and others who seek repatriation to their original posting at Ahmedabad. Mr. Shah has urged on behalf of the respondents that while the Department is doing its best to accommodate the petitioners and other repatriators according to the availability of the posts for the departmental candidates, there is no fixed quota as such. It appears that it would be proper that there should be a fixed quota allotted for the petitioners who seek repatriation to their original posts. When the Department has adopted a liberalised policy to bring back its employees who have gone out in promotion and have served outside for five years and more, it would also be proper that the liberalised scheme works in a fair and ascertainable manner rather than leaving it to be implemented in a haphazard or uncertain manner. Mr. Tanna has suggested that out of the total number of promotional posts available to the departmental candidates, 10% may be set apart for the persons who seek repatriation under the liberalized scheme. Mr. Shah however points out that allocating 10% of the promotional posts to repatriators, may do injustice to the persons who are eligible for promotion locally. He suggests that 5% of the promotional posts would be sufficient to accommodate the petitioners and similar other applicants who seek repatration. Mr. Shah also points out that this problem is particularly acute in Ahmedabad from where considerably larger number of persons opt to go out on promotion. In divisions other than Ahmedabad, according to Mr. Shah, the problem is not so acute and therefore in Ahmedabad, a slightly larger appropriation have to be accommodated when compared to other divisions. Hence, it appears fair and just that the Posts and Telegraphs Department should be directed to set apart between 5% and 10% of the total number of vacancies available for the departmental candidates who have gone out of their places with a view to take promotion from postmen to clerks. This ratio of 5% to 10% to be allocated to those who seek repatriation will be operated depending on the number of applications in any division at a given time. This ratio of 5% to 10% to be allocated to those who seek repatriation will be operated depending on the number of applications in any division at a given time. This would give the persons who seek repatriation after having served for five years at a place where they have gone to obtain promotion certainty that within a reasonable time they will have an opportunity to come back to their original places under the liberalized scheme. It will at the same time adequately safeguard the interest of the departmental candidates who will be entitled to the promotion locally will have 40% to 45% of the number of vacancies available to them at their own places without having to go out to obtain the promotion. 4. Mr. Shah has urged that it may be clarified that the above directions given by this court do not create any absolute right in favour of the petitioners or similar other applicants who seek repatriation. While it is true that no absolute rights are created in favour of any employee to seek and obtain a transfer back to the original place as a matter of right, but when a Govt. Department lays down a certain policy and adopts certain guidelines, those are expected to be followed scrupulously and fairly. Hence the guidelines laid down by the Posts and Telegraphs Department have to be followed and not to be ignored arbitrarily and therefore the directions given above are to be understood in this sense that while the Department has a discretion, it would follow the rules and guidelines in such a way that there would not be any arbitrary, unfair or unjust denial of benefit to its employees. The above directions with regard to giving 5% to 10% posts to the petitioners and other applicants seeking repatriation the same would be operative with effect from 1981 because in the years 1981 and 1982, there were vacancies available to the departmental candidates out of which, the petitioners and other applicants seeking repatriation could have been given accommodation. But for the reasons best known to the Department, the vacant Dosts are filled in by the direct recruits thus adversely affecting the rights of the departmental candidates and those seeking repatriation. The respondents are further directed to rectify the balance which was disturbed by recruiting larger number of direct recruits at the cost of departmental candidates. But for the reasons best known to the Department, the vacant Dosts are filled in by the direct recruits thus adversely affecting the rights of the departmental candidates and those seeking repatriation. The respondents are further directed to rectify the balance which was disturbed by recruiting larger number of direct recruits at the cost of departmental candidates. The excess in recruitment of direct recruits above their allocated 50% quota, would be adjusted in future appointments so as to correct the imbalance of the past few years. It is further directed that if there is a shortfall in the departmental quota for the departmental candidates as well as repatriators, shall be carried over to the next year so that in the subsequent year, the departmental candidates will have larger number of posts available for promotion. 5. In the result, the petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute to the above extent. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. Petition allowed.