SBCWP2915/1997 // 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2915/1997 Ram Kanwar Meena Vs. State of Rajasthan and Another Date of Order ::: 25.03.2010 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq None present for petitioner Ms. Sunita Satyarthi, Additional Government Counsel for respondents #### By the Court:- Case called. No one is present on behalf of petitioner even in second round. Heard learned Additional Government Counsel for respondents. Petitioner Ram Kanwar Meena has filed this writ petition being aggrieved by his non- promotion to the post of Office Superintendent on presmise that this post was reserved in the roster point at Serial No.4 for Scheduled Tribe candidate, and that respondents were required to consider his case for promotion against this post as the vacancy arose in the year 1996-97. However, contention of petitioner is that in so far as promotion granted to Shri Jugraj Chorotia by order dated 29.03.1997 is SBCWP2915/1997 // 2 // concerned, this was not done in conformity with direction of this Court passed in his writ petition being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.950/1995, on 18.03.1997. This Court directed that Jugraj Chorotia be considered for promotion to the post of Office Superintendent on the date when Shri K.S. Bohra was promoted, whose promotion order was set aside by that judgment. Ms. Sunita Satyarthi, learned Additional Government Counsel for respondents, submitted that in so far as promotion of Shri K.S. Bohra is concenred, that was stayed by Division Bench of this Court and that appeal is still pending before the Division Bench. However, so far as petitioner is concerned, despite there being applicability of hundred point roster system, the petitioner could not be considered eligible for promotion against vacancy of the year 1996- 97 because he had not completed requisite experience of four years which was required as on 01.04.1996 in terms of Rule 26-B (2) of the Rajasthan Subordinate Offices Rules, 1957 read with relevant instructions issued by the Department of Personnel from time to time. The relevant instructions dated 05.07.1975 have been reproduced by respondents in reply to writ SBCWP2915/1997 // 3 // petition. It is contended that as on 01.04.1996 petitioner could complete only 3 years 5 months and 14 days of service as Office Assistant and, therefore despite his name being found in zone of consideration, he could not be considered eligible. In view of clarification given by respondnets in their reply to writ petition, it cannot be accepted that merely because petitioner belonged to Scheduled Tribe category, he could be considered eligible for promotion despite his not having completed requisite experience of four years. It is immaterial if Departmental Promotion Committee met at later point of time but experience is to be found out on the date on which vacancy can be taken to have occurred and since vacancy in question is of the year 1996-97, therefore as per provisions of Clause (C) of Sub-Rule (1) of Rule relating to determination of vacancies and the Office Circular dated 21.12.1981, referred to in reply to writ petition, petitioner was required to possess four years experience as on 01.04.1996. I therefore do not find any merit in this writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. SBCWP2915/1997 // 4 // A copy of this judgment be endorsed to the writ petitioner for information. (Mohammad Rafiq) J. //Jaiman//