C. M. Navar ( 1 ) THE present writ petition is directed against the revised seniority lists dated 23rd April, 1977 and 16th July, 1979 (Annexures P-1 and P-2 respectively) framed by the respondents which in effect set aside the tentative seniority lists, issued on 22nd March, 1968 and 6th September, 1968 (Annexures P-3 and P-4 ). ( 2 ) THE petitioner joined Anti Malaria Department of respondent No. 1 as a Anti Larval Jamadar with effect from 9th November, 1949. It is contended that he performed his duties efficiently, honestly and with integrity and there was no complaint against him, whatsoever. The petitioner was subsequently promoted from the said post as Surveillance Inspector with effect from 1st February, 1961 in the pay scale of Rs. 100-5-125-6-155-EB-6-185 vide office order No. 1187 dated 21st February, 1961 (Annexure P-5 ). The petitioner contended that he was promoted to the higher post of Malaria Inspector with effect from 1st November, 1961 vide office order dated 23rd October, 1961 and he was given the revised pay scale of Rs. 150- 10-290. Copy of the order is filed as Annexure P-6 to the writ petition and the same reads as follows: "municipal CORPORATION OF DELHI (HEALTH DEPARTMENT) OFFICE OF THE MUNICIPAL HEALTH OFFICER TOWN HALL, DELHI Office order No. HO/gen/95-514 Dated23. 10. 1961 Sub:posting AND TRANSFERS-MALARIA INSPECTORS The following transfers of Malaria Inspectors will take effect from 1st November 1961:- 1. Shri B. R. Sachdeva, Surveillance Inspector, Jama Masjid area tota. Zone as Malaria Inspector vice Shri U. C. Chopra posted as Surveillance Inspector in place of Shri B. R. Sachdeva. 2. Surveillance Inspector Shri Gian Chand as Malaria Inspector South Zone against the vacant post. D. H. O. (Malaria) may put up proposals to fill up the vacancy of Surveillance Inspector caused by the posting of Shri Gian Chand. Sd/- Col. M. S. Boparai, Municipal Health Officer" 3. The reading of the above said order would indicate that the petitioner was placed in the post of Malaria Inspector w. e. f. 1st November, 1961, though it was not specifically mentioned in the said order that he was promoted to the said post. The seniority of the petitioner in the cadre of Malaria Inspector was first reflected in the tentative list framed on 22nd March, 1968 (Annexure P-3 to the Writ Petition ). The seniority of the petitioner in the cadre of Malaria Inspector was first reflected in the tentative list framed on 22nd March, 1968 (Annexure P-3 to the Writ Petition ). The name of the petitioner was shown in the said seniority list at serial No. 22. The reading of the list indicated that one Kirpal Singh, who was senior to the petitioner, was placed at serial No. 21 and Sikander Lal, respondent No. 7, was shown at serial No. 23 on the basis of their respective seniority as Malaria Inspectors. The said list was repeated in the revised tentative seniority list issued on 6th September, 1968 where once again the petitioner was shown in the manner as indicated above at serial No. 20. The respondents thereafter revised the seniority list and re-framed the same, as is evident from reading of Annexures P-1 and P-2, which incidentally were also tentative and provisional seniority lists. These two lists did not disturb the seniority of any other person, such as, respondents No. 7 to 22 but modified the seniority of the petitioner and placed him below all the respondents 7 to 22. The petitioner felt aggrieved by re-casting of the lists and submitted his representation to the respondents on different dates. Reference may be made to one of the said representations dated 13th February, 1979 wherein the petitioner impugned the revision of his seniority on the following basis: (a) that he joined Anti Malaria Department as Anti Larval Jamadar with effect from 9th November, 1949; (b) that he was promoted from that post as Surveillance Inspector on 1st February, 1961 in the pay scale of (150-5-175 EB- 6-280); (c) that he was again promoted to the higher post of Malaria Inspector w. e. f. 1st November, 1961,in the pay scale of 150-10-290; (d) that three grades of Malaria Inspectors/health Inspectors and Surveillance Inspectors were merged into one grade on 1st April, 1964 in the pay scale of 150-10-290. The tentative seniority lists dated 22nd March, 1968 and 6th September, 1968 were issued as a consequence of the merger. The petitioner in these two lists was shown higher than the respondents on the basis of his seniority in the post of Malaria Inspector. This is quite clear from reading of the two lists. The tentative seniority lists dated 22nd March, 1968 and 6th September, 1968 were issued as a consequence of the merger. The petitioner in these two lists was shown higher than the respondents on the basis of his seniority in the post of Malaria Inspector. This is quite clear from reading of the two lists. Subsequently, the seniority of the petitioner was revised in the next provisional lists, as issued on 23rd April, 1977 and 16th July, 1979 respectively by which respondents 7 to 22, who ranked as junior to the petitioner in earlier two lists, were made senior to him. The respondents did not accept the representations of the petitioner and, as a consequence, this writ petition was filed to impugn the seniority list, as referred to above. During the pendency of the writ petition, the respondents issued the final seniority list of Senior Malaria Inspectors and circulated the same vide circular dated 28th June, 1980 which reiterated the earlier lists as framed on 23rd April, 1977 and 16th July, 1979. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that it was obvious that the petitioner was promoted as Malaria Inspector vide office order dated 23rd October, 1961, which has already been reproduced in earlier part of this judgment. This office order in paragraph 2 clearly specifies that the petitioner Gian Chand, who was earlier Surveillance Inspector was posted as Malaria Inspector, South Zone against the vacant post and proposals were invited to fill up the vacancy of Surveillance Inspector caused by posting of the petitioner. There is no dispute about the admitted position that prior to the merger, which took place on 1st April, 1964, the post of Malaria Inspector was treated as higher post as compared to the post of Surveillance Inspectors and Health Inspectors. In this context, reference may also be made to the office order dated 20th December, 1962 which will indicate that the post of Malaria Inspector was always treated as higher to the post of Surveillance Inspector. The operative part may be reproduced as follows: "the Municipal Health Officer vide his orders dated 11th December, 1962 is pleased to promote the following temporary Surveillance Inspectors as temporary Malaria Inspectors in the revised grade of Rs. 150-10-290 plus usual allowances with effect from 18th December, 1962 (forenoon ). . . . . . " 5. The operative part may be reproduced as follows: "the Municipal Health Officer vide his orders dated 11th December, 1962 is pleased to promote the following temporary Surveillance Inspectors as temporary Malaria Inspectors in the revised grade of Rs. 150-10-290 plus usual allowances with effect from 18th December, 1962 (forenoon ). . . . . . " 5. The respondents have filed their counter affidavit to the show cause notice issued to the writ petition wherein it is reiterated that the petitioner was not promoted as Malaria Inspector w. e. f. November 1, 1961 vide office order dated October 23, 1961, as alleged. He was merely transferred and posted as Malaria Inspector. The said transfer order cannot be held to confer promotion. The petitioner was also junior to respondents 7 to 22 prior to 23rd October, 1961 and he could not have been promoted out of turn over the head of respondents 7 to 22. It was further stated that the post of Surveillance Inspector and Malaria Inspector were of equal status and were inter se transferable. Therefore, the respondents on that basis revised the seniority of the petitioner on that ground though he was promoted as Malaria Inspector prior to the above said respondents. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the order of transfer, as issued on 23rd October, 1961 (Annexure P-6) is in effect an order of promotion. It is clearly stated in paragraph 2 that the petitioner, who was earlier SurveillanceInspector was being posted on a vacant post of Malaria Inspector and proposals were invited to fill up the vacancy of Surveillance Inspector caused by the posting of the petitioner. 7. The facts are not in dispute. The respondents had earlier treated the post of Malaria Inspector as higher to the post of Surveillance Inspector, The only dispute is with regard to the order as mentioned above, as to whether, it could be termed as an order of promotion or merely an order of transfer. The petitioner was posted as Malaria Inspector by this order. The mere absence of the word "promotion" from this order will not indicate, in any manner, that he was only transferred as Malaria Inspector. In that case,the transfer would only contemplate posting from Surveillance Inspector to the same post. The petitioner was posted as Malaria Inspector by this order. The mere absence of the word "promotion" from this order will not indicate, in any manner, that he was only transferred as Malaria Inspector. In that case,the transfer would only contemplate posting from Surveillance Inspector to the same post. The order clearly stipulates that the petitioner was to take over as Malaria Inspector against the vacant post and even the proposals for filling up the vacancy of Surveillance Inspectors were invited. In this view it can safely be held that the petitioner was promoted to the post of Malaria Inspector from the post of Surveillance Inspector w. e. f. November 1,1961. This order was given effect to by the tentative lists framed by the respondents on 22nd March, 1968 and 6th September, 1968 respectively. There was no change in these two lists for a period of about 9-10 years when the revised provisional seniority lists were issued on 23rd April, 1977 and 16th July, 1979 respectively which placed the petitioner at a much lower place than the one to which he was entitled to on the basis of seniority as Malaria Inspector. The names of respondents 7 to 22 as a result were inserted In the said list above the name of the petitioner. There was no revision and final assessment of the list was not made till after the petitioner approached this Court by means of this writ petition. The final seniority list of Malaria Inspectors to which the petitioner and respondents 7 to 22 had been promoted was framed vide circular dated 28th June, 1980" 8. The petitioner was previously holding the post of Surveillance Inspector from which he was promoted to the post of Malaria Inspector w. e. f. November 1, 1961. There is no dispute that he was senior to the respondents in that post before the three Grades of Malaria Inspectors, Surveillance Inspectors, and Health Inspectors were merged into one from April 1,1964. He, accordingly, held a higher post prior to the date of merger and his seniority was duly reflected on that basis in the lists framed on 22nd March, 1968 and 6th September, 1968. That was the correct way to frame the seniority list as it is well settled that a person or persons holding the higher postal the time of merger had to be reflected in the seniority list in that manner. That was the correct way to frame the seniority list as it is well settled that a person or persons holding the higher postal the time of merger had to be reflected in the seniority list in that manner. The framing of the original seniority list, accordingly, was correct and there was no justification in revising the same on the basis of the merger of the three posts on a subsequent date. 9. The writ petition, as a consequence, is allowed. The rule is made absolute. The seniority of the petitioner is correctly reflected in the seniority lists, as framed on 22nd March, 1968 and 6th September, 1968 respectively. The subsequent change in the revised lists is accordingly quashed. The petitioner has since retired from service. The consequential relief, such as, consideration to higher post as well as for any monetary benefits shall be granted to the petitioner on this basis. The petitioner shall also be entitled to costs of this petition, which are quantified at Rs. 2,500. 00.