DBSAW NO.182/08. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (WRIT) NO.182/2008. In S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6300/1997. Narayan Singh Vs. Union of India and ors. Date of order:- September 10, 2008. PRESENT HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI NARAYAN ROY HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr. P.S. Sharma for the appellant. Mr. Sumit Khandelwal for the respondents. ***** BY THE COURT :- Heard counsel for the parties. 2) The order dated 7/8/2006, passed in writ jurisdiction is being assailed by this appeal. 3) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that case of promotion of the writ-petitioner who was Subedar was not considered whereas, juniors to him were considered and promoted. It is also submitted that honorary promotion could have been granted on the post of Subedar Major and, thereafter, on the post of Lefteunant and Captain. 4) From the facts as stated in the writ application, it would appear that case of the writ- petitioner and other persons similarly situated was considered for promotion to the post of Subedar and a DBSAW NO.182/08. 2 select list was prepared. From the select list, 39 persons were promoted to the post of Subedar but no promotion was granted to this appellant writ- petitioner as he was at Sr.No.40 and vacancies were only 39. This was done on 1/11/1996. Immediately thereafter, writ-petitioner retired from services w.e.f. 30/11/1996 and after his retirement, honorary promotion was given to him on the post of Subedar Major on 26/1/1997. 5) It appears from the reply filed on behalf of the respondents that on account of non-grant of promotion to the writ-petitioner appellant on 1/11/1996, his case was processed for grant of honorary promotion and immediately after his retirement, same was given to him w.e.f. 26/1/1997. 6) In view of the pleadings of the writ- petitioner, no promotion could have been granted to him on honorary basis either on the post of Subedar Major, Lieutenant or Captain. No rule has been shown to us providing such promotions in quick succession before or after retirement. At the same time, we find that no junior person to the appellant writ-petitioner was promoted whereas, it is evidently clear from the pleadings of the parties that persons who were above him upto Sr.No.39 were promoted and he was at Sr.No.40. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, therefore, we do not find any merit in this appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed. DBSAW NO.182/08. 3 (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. (NARAYAN ROY), CJ. anil