WP(C) 3257/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MR B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. C. Barua, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. T. Barman, learned counsel for the Social Welfare Department. I have also heard Mr . J.I. Borbhuiya, learned counsel representing the respondent No.29. The matter relates to alleged deprivation of promotion to the post of AC DPO/CDPO. According to the petitioner, she has been deprived in the matter of pr omotion, inasmuch as her juniors have been allowed to supersede her. Mrs. T. Barman, learned counsel representing the Social Welfare Departme nt, has produced the letter dated 11.11.2011 addressed to the Commissioner and S ecretary to the Govt. of Assam in the Social Welfare Department by the Director of Social Welfare Department. The letter reveals that as many as 22 incumbents j unior to the petitioner were promoted to the post of ACDPO/CDPO, which includes 6(six) incumbents from SC Category, 4 (Four) from ST(P) Category and 2 (two) fro m ST(H) category. The letter further reveals that as per the gradation list date d 16.2.2010, there are 14 (fourteen) other Supervisors senior to the petitioner, who are yet to be promoted to the higher ranks. Accordingly, by the said letter , a proposal has been made for prospective promotion of the petitioner along wit h said 14 incumbents. Law is well settled that junior cannot supersede a senior in the matter of promotion unless applying the same yardstick and parameters, they are found m ore suitable than the seniors. This is precisely the reason, the Director of Soc ial Welfare has made the proposal for upgradation of 14 incumbents to the promot ional post of ACDPO/CDPO. If a senior of over-looked in the matter of promotion, applying the test of Next Below Rule his / her case(s) is required to be cons idered at par with the said junior. In view of the above and in acceptance of the proposal made by the Direc tor of Social Welfare Department vide his above letter dated 11.11.2011, this wr it petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the promotion o f the petitioner and other senior Supervisors to the post of ACDPO/CDPO, at par with their juniors and from the date they were so promoted. However, it is made clear that they will not be entitled to any back wages but their pay may be fixe d notionally. It is expected that the respondents will do the needful in this regard a s expeditiously as possible, preferably within 4 (Four) months. The above letter dated 11.11.2011 shall form part of the record. With the above directions and observations, the writ petition stands dis posed of, without however, any order as to costs.