h). case af 'I'ha péfifionar— recommended ihe nama of We raspandzm No.3 for prama‘i‘inn +0 #he pas? of Hadrian! Inspector. Per- confm, Ms Sharmila Singhai, learned counsa! appearing for +he respandan+s Na. 1 ant! 2 an 'Hw basis of ‘H‘ia rafum submits ‘Hm‘f 1112 triferia far pramm‘ian was merif-wm-seniorify, +hz pe'i'i‘l'ianar was workmg m 'Hw pump-house and 'khe respandan‘t N93 was warkmg m the zlzc'h‘mul dzpnr‘tmzn‘f righf fmm H12 da‘fa af +halr appain‘hnen‘fs. Therefare, loakmg mm 'H1a experience of fhe responden'f Na.3 he was recommended far 'H‘Ie pasi’ af' Electrical inspecfar. On +he basis 0f fhe return iearned counse! further submrts fha‘t' 'H'te mse a. fhe pefmoner is under canSIderahan for promo‘tion. Despi‘fe service of no+ice 'H‘ne responden‘r Na.3 has chasen naf 1‘0 appear in +he ma‘H'er. pa I have heard iearned caunsel appearing far 'Hne par-ties, perused fhe p!eadin9s and +he documen'rs appended fherefo‘ I1' €s evidevrr 1haf fhe pe‘rH'ianer as we“ as 1he responden‘r No.3, bafh were appain‘l'ed as Eiec'frical Mechanic. The appoin‘i‘men'i' of 'i'he pe‘i’ifioner was muah earlier +0 1‘he respondenf No.3 i.e. ‘I'he’ pe+i+ioner was four years senior fa fhe responder-if No.3. Neifher of fhe par'ries has produced any document indicafing +he5cri1'eria for promo‘i‘ion. There is specific avermenf of fhe pe‘i’ifianer— fha'i' he was no? considered and recommended for promotion fo fhe posi' of Electrical Inspector. If is no‘t clear from any record produced by the respondents that 'the- petii'ioner was considered and on being found “the respondent No.3 as more suifable for the post of V Eleci'rical Inspector, he was promoted. Beftha't as i‘t may, even if 'the criteria of merit-cum-seniori'ty is ’ followed, +he petitioner ought 'to have been considered. In absence of considerafion of The petitioner, 'the decision of 'the respondent No.1 fo promote 'the rapondenf No.3 canno'l' be held as proper and legal. 8. Since fha respandenf No.3 was pramofed way back in December, 1998, if is naf nacessary m quash ‘H‘ne pr—oma‘rinn order. However, in 1412 facts and circumsfnnces of 'H‘ie case, the respenderrt Na.1 is direc'l'ed f0 consider- +he case of +he pe‘fi‘fianer far- proma'i'ian wef. ‘H'ie da‘fe when We respondeM' N03 was promO'I'ed and pass aprapr—ia‘fe order. For 'l'he reasans menfioned hereinabOVe, 'H‘ie pe‘fi'rion is aiiowed fa ‘fhe above extent No arder ash) cas'rs. Satish K.. Whoa-1 Judge Sd/- Thdkm' p