1 D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL NO.460/1996 Bapu Lal Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of Order :: 23-01-2007 HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI S.N.JHA HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Shri Mahesh Bora for the appellant. Shri B.L. Tiwari, Dy.G.A. for the respondents. **** This special appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 29.1.1996 dismissing the writ petition of the appellant. The appellant had filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition no.173/1996 seeking direction for his promotion on the post of Weldor Grade-I. Earlier he had raised an industrial dispute which was referred to the Labour Court, Udaipur for adjudication in the following terms :- Whether the denial of promotion to Bapu Lal, (i.e. the appellant) to the post of Weldor Grade-I on the basis of seniority by the Chief Engineer and Superintending Engineer, Division-II, Mahi Project, Banswara was proper and valid; and if not, what reliefs he was entitled to. On consideration of the materials brought on record by the parties, the labour court found that Kanhaiya Lal and Syeed Mohammed who were promoted on 2 the post, were junior to the appellant. The labour court passed an award to the effect that the respondents do constitute a Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC), consider the case of the appellant for promotion and if he is found fit and suitable for the post, promote him on the post from the date his juniors were promoted to the post of Weldor Grade-I. As the award was not implemented, the appellant moved the Labour Commissioner, Jaipur for necessary action in terms of Section 29 of the Industrial Dispute Act, and finally came to this Court. From the documents annexed to the writ petition, it appears that the DPC was constituted about which the appellant was informed vide letter dated 6.1.1994. Counsel for the appellant submitted that as earlier the DPC found the appellant fit and suitable, there was no occasion to constitute another DPC. It appears from the submissions of the counsel that the recommendations of the DPC was not accepted by the department, and another DPC was constituted which again considered the case of the appellant which did not find him suitable for promotion. No employee can claim any vested right to promotion, the only right which he can claim is a right of consideration. Award of the labour court was precisely to this effect. The case of the appellant having been considered by the DPC, we are satisfied that the award stood implemented and the appellant cannot make any 3 grievance. In course of hearing, it transpired that the appellant superannuated from service some time in 2002 which, in our opinion, puts an end to the dispute. The grievance has become stale and no relief can be granted at this stage. The appeal is dismissed. [GOVIND MATHUR],J. [S.N.JHA],CJ. Skant/-