OM PRAKASH, J. The short question for consideration in this writ petition is whether joint seniority list of XVI Batch of Head Rakshaks announced by a letter dated 21-1-1985 is valid. 2. The petitioners were promoted to the grade of Head Rakshak from the grade of Senior Rakshak working in the Railway Protection Force Northern Railway, way-back in 1976. The promotions from the grade of Senior Rakshak to the grade of Head Rakshak are required to be made in accordance with the Railway Protection Force Regulations, 1966 (herein after to be referred as the Regulations), which have been framed under Rule 32 of the Railway Protection Force Rules, 1959 (briefly, the Rules) which, in turn, were framed in exercise of the power, conferred by Sec tion 21 of the Railway Protection Force Act, 1956 (for short, the Act ). 3. It is contended that a provisional joint seniority list was circulated in the year 1984 and then objections were filed by the petitioners. Despite their objections the joint seniority list was approved, which implies that the objections made by the petitioners stood rejected. Aggrieved, the peti tioners filed the writ petition in the year 1985. 4. It is not disputed that while making promotions to the grade of Head Rakshak from the grade of Senior Rakshak, an examination was held in different divisions. Rule 24 (1) of the Rules provides that promotion from one class to another among members of the force shall be made on the basis of selection by committees appointed in this behalf and in accordance with the regulations defining eligibility of the candidate for such selection and the tests which may include written, oral and practical tests. Promo tions in grades shall, however, be on the basis of seniority-cum-suitability. (Emphasis supplied ). 5. From Rule 2d (l) of the Rules, it is manifest that promotions from one grade to another will be made on the basis of seniority-cum-suitability or seniority-cum-fitness. Promo tions in grades shall, however, be on the basis of seniority-cum-suitability. (Emphasis supplied ). 5. From Rule 2d (l) of the Rules, it is manifest that promotions from one grade to another will be made on the basis of seniority-cum-suitability or seniority-cum-fitness. Sub-rule (3) of Rule 24 provides that specially deserving Rakshaks or Senior Rakshaks, who have done good work, may be promoted to the rank of Senior Rakshaks or Head Rakshaks respectively on the basis of a selection, but the total number of such promotions shall not exceed 20 per cent of the number of promotion made to the particular cadre within the region of division at any given time and every case with the reasons for such promotion shall be placed before the Chief Security Officer. It follows from the Scheme of Rule 24 that promotions from the grade of Senior Rakshak to the grade of Head Rakshak will be made on the basis of seniority- cum-suitability, subject to the condition that 20 per cent of the number of promotions made to the grade of Head Rakshak can be promoted by selection as envisaged by sub-rule (3) of Rule 24. It explains why the written test was held to make promotions to the grade of Head Rakshak. Ordinarily, to make promotion on the basis of seniority-cum-fitness or seniority-cum-suitability no examination is required to be held, because in that case the promotion will be made on the basis of seniority subject to rejection of unfit. Because 20 per cent of the number of promo tions made to a particular grade can be made by way of selection, examina tion was held of Senior Rakshaks for promoting them to the grade of Head Rakshak. This is no bodys case that promotions made by way of selection exceeded 20 per cent. 6. The contention of learned Counsel for the petitioners before us is that no centralised list or joint seniority list was prepared of the Senior Rakshaks, who were promoted to the grade of Head Rakshaks. This is no bodys case that promotions made by way of selection exceeded 20 per cent. 6. The contention of learned Counsel for the petitioners before us is that no centralised list or joint seniority list was prepared of the Senior Rakshaks, who were promoted to the grade of Head Rakshaks. In para-, graph 15 of the writ petition the averment is : "in the Joint Seniority list of the Head Rakshaks inter se seniority of the XVI Batch of Head Rakshaks has been fixed according to their seniority given in the panels formed in the Division by the respective Security Officers and arranged in the order of the announcement of the panel by the Security Officer of the Division concerned. Panels of Head Rakshaks were announced for Bikaner, Ferozpur and Jodhpur Divisions first in point of time and on the same date as there is one Security Officer for the three divisions. Followed next by Delhi Division panel and then Allahabad, Moradabad and lastly Lucknow Divisions announced their panels of Head Rakshaks as a result of selection made at the Divisional level. " In paragraph 16 of the writ petition it is further averred : "in Joint Seniority List of XVIth Batch of Head Rakshaks of Ferozpur and Jodhpur are placed at the top enbloc followed by Head Rakshaks of Delhi Division in enbloc and so on," 7. The contention of learned Counsel for the petitioners is that the respondents erred in law in preparing the joint seniority list of XVIth Batch of Head Rakshaks on the basis of the tests held division- wise. It is submitted that when promotions were made on the basis of seniority-cum-suitability subject to the condition that 20 per cent of the number of pro motions can be made by selection, a centralized or joint seniority list should have been drawn up adhering to the seniority as per the seniority list of Senior Rakshaks, which will be the basis for promoting to the grade of Head Rakshak on the criterian of seniority-cum-suitability. If joint list is pre pared on the basis of the test held division-wise, says Counsel for the peti tioners, the entire seniority list of the grade of Senior Rakshaks, who wore promoted to the grade of Head Rakshaks, will stand disturbed. If joint list is pre pared on the basis of the test held division-wise, says Counsel for the peti tioners, the entire seniority list of the grade of Senior Rakshaks, who wore promoted to the grade of Head Rakshaks, will stand disturbed. It is con tended that when 80 per cent promotions are to be made on the basis of seniority-cum-suitability, seniority of the Santos" Rakshaks promoted to the grade of Head Rakshaks will remain the same what it was for the grade of Senior Rakshaks subject to those who were found unfit for promotion. 8. Regulation 11 of the Regulations entitles as "promotion of Senior Rafcshaks to the grade of Ha ad Rakshaks" Regulation 11 (1) of the Regula tions relating to the promotion of Senior Rakshaks to the grade of Head Rakshaks provides that promotion to the grade of Head Rakshaks shall be made by the Security Officer concerned on the basis of an approved list to be prepared centrally on the result of a test both written and oral at the Headquarters of the Security Officer concerned. Regulation 11 (1) further says that for holding tests selection committee will be formed and that such committees shall prepare a list of successful candidates in the order 01 Chair seniority as Senior Rakshaks in the respective cadres, but those securing a total of more than 75 par cent marks will be classed as outstanding and will be placed on the top in the seniority list in the order of their seniority. 9. From the scheme of the Rules and the Regulations reproduced hereinabove, it is clear that 80 per cent promotions from the grade of Senior Rakshaks to the grade of Haad Rakshaks will be made on the basis of seniority-cum-suitability and 20 par cant promotions to the said grade will be made on the basis of selection test. Those who secure 75 par cant marks will be classed separately as outstanding and they will remain at the top of the list. In this writ petition we are not concerned with the class of outstanding, inasmuch as all the petitioners have been promoted on the basis of seniority-cum-suitability. Regulation 11 clearly indicates that on the basis of approved list a centralized list will be prepared. In this writ petition we are not concerned with the class of outstanding, inasmuch as all the petitioners have been promoted on the basis of seniority-cum-suitability. Regulation 11 clearly indicates that on the basis of approved list a centralized list will be prepared. The question-is what will be the basis of such a centralized list, which is to be prepared for those who are promoted on the basis of seniority-cum-suitability. Their seniority will not be maintained on the basis of their performance m the examination but on the basis of seniority list of the grade of Senior Rakshak. If no one was found unfit, then their seniority in the grade of Head Rakshak will be the same what it was in the grade of Senior Rakshak. If the seniority list is drawn up afresh on the basis of division-wise test, as it is said to have been done in this case by the petitioners, which has not been controverted at all by the respondents, then the seniority of the peti tioners or those who are promoted on the basis of seniority- cum-suitability will get entirely disturbed and this is the short grievance of the petitioner. Paragraph ID of the writ petition has been admitted in paragraph 13 of the counter-affidavit. Therefore, it is not denied that in the joint seniority list of Head Rakshaks inter se seniority of the XVIth Batch of Head Rakshaks has been fixed according to their seniority given in the panels formed in the division by respective Security Officer and arranged in the order of the date. ,; announcement of the panel by the Security Officer of the division con cerned. In our opinion, joint seniority list of promoted Head Rakshaks cannot be prepared on the basis of panel-wise tests held in various divisions, but so far as the promotions made on the basis of seniority-cum-suitability are concerned a centralized seniority list should have been prepared on the basis of seniority list of the grade of Senior Rakshaks, which was considered for making the promotions to the grade of Head Rakshaks. Learned Standing Counsel, appearing for the respondents, has not shown us any provision of law in support of joint seniority list, prepared on the basis of panel-wise test held in various divisions. Learned Standing Counsel, appearing for the respondents, has not shown us any provision of law in support of joint seniority list, prepared on the basis of panel-wise test held in various divisions. So far as the Head Rakshaks falling in outstanding class are concerned, their seniority will be strictly on the basis of their merits, but that will also be drawn centrally. 10. It is, therefore, patent that the joint seniority list of XVIth Batch of Head Rakshaks, which was made on the basis of panel-wise test held in various divisions runs counter to Regulation 11 and Rule 24 (3) and, there fore, that cannot be sustained. 11. In the result, the petition succeeds and is allowed. Respondents are directed to draw up a centralized seniority list of the Head Rakshaks of XVIth on the basis of seniority list of the grade of Senior Rakshak, which was in force at the relevant time when the examination was held for pro moting Senior Rakshaks to the grade of Head Rakshak. The petitioners will then be entitled to all consequential benefits as per the centralized seniority list to be drawn up, as aforesaid. Parties will bear their own costs. Petition allowed. .