IN TH E H IGH COURT OF UTTARAKH AND AT NAINITAL W RIT PETITION NO. 1959 OF 20 0 3 (S/ S) Lal Chand ………..Petitioner. Versus Director, Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, Uttaranchal at Dehradun and others. …………...Respondents. Mr. I.S. Mehra, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Vikas Pandey, Advocate, holding the brief of Sri V.B.S. Negi, learned counsel for the respondents. 25 th J u ly, 20 0 8 H on ’ble P.C. Ver m a , J . By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to promote the petitioner since the time persons appointed along with him were promoted or since juniors to him were promoted and he be given all consequential benefits accruing to him. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed on the substantive post of Chaprasi in Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti on 1.12.1997. The respondent no. 3 was also appointed along with the petitioner on 1.12.1977 and he was promoted on 29.4.1991 to the post of Clerk / Stenographer. On 19.12.2002, the respondent vide his letter, short listed the candidates, who were eligible to be promoted from Class IV to Class III Clerk Cadre, where the name of the petitioner was shown at Serial No. 2 and he was personally informed to appear for interview / examination on 23.12.2002. According to the petitioner, he passed the examination along with other candidates. On 19.6.2003, the respondent no. 2 had released a list of 10 candidates 2 found to be eligible for promotion on 19.6.2003, but the name of the petitioner did not figure there. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the persons, who were not having requisite qualification, have been promoted, but the petitioner, who is having requisite qualification, has been deprived of promotion. 4. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents stating therein in paragraph 4 that Prathama and Madhyama Examination from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan Allahabad is not equivalent to High School / Intermediate of U.P. Education Board. It has further been stated that the Certificate / Degree awarded by the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Allahabad has not been recognized by the State of U.P. or State of Uttarakhand. 5. Against the said counter, a rejoinder affidavit has been filed by the petitioner, where in paragraph 2 (F), it has been stated that one Mr. Ranjit Singh, Clerk is also Prathma and Madhyama and was promoted to that post from IV. 6. Heard Counsel for both the parties. 7. In view of the above submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner to Class-III post 3 (Clerk), in case similarly situated person(s) has/ have been promoted to Class-III (Clerk) from the Class-IV post. 8. With the aforesaid direction, writ petition is disposed of finally. No order as to costs. 25.7.2008 Rathour (P.C. Verma, J.)