IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. C.W.P.(T) No. : 850 of 2008. Decided on: 09.03.2010. _________________________________________________________ Ranjeet Singh. …Petitioner. -Versus- State of Himachal Pradesh and another. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Mr. Keshav Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents. : Mr. R.K. Sharma, Senior Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rajinder Dogra Additional Advocate General. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge(Oral): Material facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that as per panel drawn by the respondents, the name of petitioner was at Sr. No. 1263 and the name of one Shri Man Singh was at Sr. No. 1249 A. The seniority number of Shri Man Singh was deleted and shifted to 1470 A vide corrigendum dated 25th August, 2007. In other words, he was rendered junior to petitioner in seniority list. However, Shri Man Singh was promoted on regular basis to the post of Block Elementary Education Officer vide office order dated 1st September, 2007. Petitioner filed an Original Application No. 2840 of 2007 before 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. the learned Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, whereby he had challenged the promotion of Shri Man Singh to the post of Block Elementary Education Officer. The learned Tribunal was pleased to direct the Original Application to be treated as representation on 20.10.2007. The same was decided by the Director on 20.11.2007. The Director of Elementary Education recorded in his order that respondent No. 3, i.e. Man Singh was wrongly promoted to the post of Block Elementary Education Officer. The review D.P.C. was held and promotion orders of Shri Man Singh were withdrawn on 17.12.2007. Consequently, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Block Elementary Education Officer vide office order dated 27.12.2007 (Annexure A-2). The case of the petitioner, in nut-shell, is that he should have been considered for promotion to the post of Block Elementary Education Officer from the date when Shri Man Singh was promoted, i.e. 1st September, 2007. The State has not chosen to file any reply to the present petition. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the pleadings carefully. The Court is of the considered view that Shri Man Singh was wrongly considered for promotion to the post of Block Elementary Education Officer on 1st September, 2007. The petitioner was senior to him as per corrigendum issued on 25th August, 2007. The promotion orders of Shri Man Singh were withdrawn, however, the petitioner was not considered for promotion from the due date. He should have been considered and promoted from the date when Shri Man Singh was promoted, i.e. 1st September, 2007. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Block Elementary Education Officer w.e.f. 1st September, 2007 instead of 27.12.2007 with all consequential benefits. The needful be done within a period of six weeks from today. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge March 9, 2010. (bhupender)