IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTCSGARH AT BILASPUR Review Petition No. ^ ^ of 2011 yi^JSIOII ^ ApDlicant/ Respondent in W.A. No. 67/10/Petitioner in W.P.No. 3083/05 ^Punilal Chauhan, aged about 36 years, son of Shri Nanku Ram Chauhon, Ayurved Compounder, Govt. Ayurvedik Aushdholaya, Jatri, TahsiE & District Raigorh (C.6.) VERSUS NON-APPLICANTS/ >1. State of Chhattisgarh Appellants in W.A. No. 67/10/Respondents inW.P.No. 3083/05 .\\yy/ ,^-^::4 .----" ..'" ^/ ^ ^' ^-^ ^y; ^" ^ -^ through the Secretary Department of Health, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) The birector Bhartiya Chikitsa Padhati Evam Homeopathy, Behind D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.&.) The bistrict Ayurveds'k Adhikari, Near Shriram Colony BeiGdula Road, Raigorh (C.G.) APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF ORbER DATED 26:10.2010 PASSED IN WRIT APPEAL N0^7 OF 2010 c>\' /cb .0 .Review Petition No. 62/2011 li:::,.::~iiir-.ii4 ^- ORDER (24.08.2011) The respondent in W.A. No. 67/2010 has filed this Review Petition. This Court vide judgment dated 26.10.2010 allowed the Writ Appeal filed by the State/appellant and judgment and order passed by Single Judge by which W.P. No. 3083/2005 was allowed, was set-aside. After passirig of the order in appeal, the applicant filed S.L.P. (Civil) No(s). 1559/2011 in the Supreme Court which was dismissed as withdrawn on 28.01.2011 with the following order:- "ORDER Counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this petition with liberty to approach the High Court with a review petition. Permission is granted. The Special Leave Petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty as prayed for." The applicant has filed the Review Petition mainly on the ground that degree possessed by him was recognized; and if the Rules are interpreted in the manner as interpreted by this Court in Writ Appeal, the promotional avenue of the applicant shall be closed forever. We have already observed in Para-2 of the judgment that the Single Judge has held vide Para-9 of the order that degree possessed by the applicant was not recognized. The ^m^^^^g^s^, ^nt^ri^—Fs/i4i— 3/201 i—so.ooo. XV-OR-15 ^ applicant did not challenge the said part of the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Even in appeal the applicant did not raise this ground. The main consideration before us in appeal was the validity of the order passed by the Single Judge mainly relating to the entitlement of the applicant for promotion on the basis of relevant Rules. We have recorded clear findi.ng that since the applicant was not having minimum qualification for appointment to the post of Assistant Ayurved Medical Officer as prescribed in Schedule III, therefore, he was not entitled for promotion. So far as closure of promotional avenue is concerned, that alone cannot be ground for promotion in a case in which the claimant is lacking in basic qualification. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find sufficient ground to entertain the Review Petition. The same is liable to the rejected and is hereby rejected. Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge S ^T-"