HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.16382 of 2011 ORDER: 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner requested to pass orders in the W.P.M.P. No.19647 of 2011. Since the prayer in the W.P.M.P. and the prayer in the main writ petition are one and the same, the writ petition itself is taken up for disposal. 2. The present writ petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to participate in the process of selection from the feeder category of Junior Management Scale-I to Officer Middle Management Scale-II on par with his juniors in pursuance of the circular No.PER & HRD No.17/2011-12, dated 19.05.2011, issued by the first respondent. 3. The brief facts of the case that are necessary for disposal of the present writ petition may be stated as follows: - The petitioner was initially appointed as Clerk-cum- Cashier on 01.03.1985 in the Regional Rural Bank. Thereafter, the first respondent-bank vide staff circular No.10, dated 29.10.2004 notified 12 vacancies for the promotion to the post of Officer Scale-I from its feeder category of Clerk-cum-Cashier. To the said selection process, the petitioner and others were successful in written examination. However, the respondent-bank deviated from the principles laid down by the Supreme Court with regard to seniority-cum-merit in Sivaiah V. Addanki Babu[1], and promoted junior most and hence, being aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed W.P.No.4497 of 2005, in which the respondent-bank filed counter admitting the seniority of the petitioner and the proposition of law on seniority-cum-merit. Subsequently, the petitioner was promoted as Officer in Junior Management (Scale-I)- Assistant Manager with effect from 06.01.2011. While so, the first respondent-bank issued circular PER&HRD No.17/2011-12 dated 19.05.2011 to all the branches for conducting written examination on 19.06.2011 to effect internal promotions from Officer Junior Management (Scale-I) to Officer Middle Management (Scale-II). Hence, the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking the aforementioned relief. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that on 14.02.2005, the respondent-bank called the eligible candidates for interview and the petitioner stood at Serial No.7, but in pursuance of that order, the petitioner was not promoted to the category of Junior Management Scale-I but his juniors were given promotion, therefore, the petitioner filed the writ petition No.4497 of 2005, wherein the respondent-bank is said to have filed a counter admitting his seniority and proposition of law on “seniority- cum-merit”, and hence, allowing the said writ petition is only a formality and that, in spite of giving letters to the Registry to post the said writ petition for final hearing, the same is not listed till date. He further contended that as many as 92 posts were notified and in the near future there is no possibility for inviting applications for the same posts and hence, the right of the petitioner to appear in the examination cannot be deprived and prays this Court to issue directions to the respondents to permit the petitioner to participate in the process of selection for the promotional post. 5. It is not in dispute that for promotion to the post of Middle Management Scale II, the feeder category is Junior Management Scale I. The petitioner was promoted as Junior Management (Scale-I)-Assistant Manager by proceedings dated 25.02.2011. The promotion order goes to show that an employee promoted to the post in Scale-I of Group A shall be on probation for a period of one year, which may be extended by the appointing authority for the period not exceeding six months. So as on today, the probation of the petitioner in the cadre of Junior Management (Scale-I) has not been completed. Unless his probation is confirmed and he puts up fives’ of service in the Junior Management (Scale-I), he is not eligible for further promotion. 6. The petitioner is seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus. It is ordinarily issued where the petitioner establishes a legal right in himself and a corresponding legal duty in the public authority. It is elementary that no one can ask for a mandamus without a legal right. In other words, there must a judicially enforceable right as well as legally protected right before one suffering a legal grievance can ask for a Mandamus. But, in the entire affidavit, filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioner did not spell out any infringement of his legal or statutory right. When he is not at all qualified for the post of Middle Management (Scale-II), the question of permitting him to participate in the selection process viz., writing the written examination, etc., does not arise. In the absence of infringement of any legal or statutory right, this Court shall not issue a writ of Mandamus. 7. The writ petition is devoid of merits and is, accordingly, dismissed, at the stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 15th June 2011 Note: Issue CC in two days. B/o Dr/Drk [1] 1998(6) SCC p-720