JUDGMENT 1. 1. Since on similar set of facts same relief has been granted by the Tribunal vide impugned orders, the above writ petitions have been heard together and are being decided by this common order. 2. Under the rules of the petitioner-Department, 25% quota has been reserved for appointment to the post of Wireless.Telecoms Maintainer Gr.III from the post of Class-IV or Khalasi. As per the above reserve quota, 9 posts were determined and written examination was held on 22.6.1992. The provisional panel was declared on 29.9.1992 which was made effective from 25.9.1992. As per provisions of the relevant rules, the persons included in the provisional panel were required to undergo a further training course. After completion of training another retention test was held on 2.12.1993 and a final panel was declared on 17.12.1993 in which 6 candidates were declared pass and 3 were shown as having failed in the retention test. However, as has come on record, three persons initially failed in the examination held on 2.12.1993, again cleared the examination held subsequently on 8.2.1994 and their result was also declared accordingly on 5.4.1994. There is also no dispute that the life of panel so prepared was for two years. As such, the provisional panel so prepared on 29.9.1992 made effective from 25.9.1992 was to exist till 24.9.1994. Before expiry of the panel, all the concerned employees had passed their retention examination and their name finds place in the panel. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that after the panel so prepared, only three persons were given appointment and rest of the posts were diverted to be filled by direct recruitees. However, on behalf of the petitioner Department, no satisfactory explanation have been given either before the Tribunal or even before this court as to under what provisions and rules the posts so reserved for appointment against 25% quota could be diverted for direct recruitment, moreso, when at the relevant time the panel so prepared by the Department existed and three persons had already been given appointment. On the face of it, there appears to be a clear case of discrimination and arbitrariness in violation of provisions of the rules. 4. Having considered entire facts and circumstances, we find no error or illegality in the directions issued by the Tribunal so as to call for any further interference. On the face of it, there appears to be a clear case of discrimination and arbitrariness in violation of provisions of the rules. 4. Having considered entire facts and circumstances, we find no error or illegality in the directions issued by the Tribunal so as to call for any further interference. However, similarly situated persons were given appointment as per the panel so prepared in the year 1994 itself. Because of pendency of the present litigation and interim order passed by this court, the relief could not be given to the concerned employees in the present writ petitions. We now deem it proper to direct the petitioners to give appointment to all the concerned employees on the post of Wireless Telecom Maintainer Gr. III from the date other persons from the same panel have been so appointed. The concerned respondent employees shall be entitled for the benefit of seniority from the date of similarly situated employees so appointed as also notional pay fixation till the date of joining, however, shall not be entitled of any arrears. Since the concerned respondent employees have been made to suffer because of irregularity and illegality committed by the Department and deprived of their legal right for last 15 years, in the interest of justice, the petitioners are also directed to pay a cost by way of compensation of Rs. 10,000/- to each of the concerned respondent employees. Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly.Writ Petition Disposed of as Above. *******