1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 955/2008 (Raju Prabhakarrao Wakade vs. Zilla Parishad and another) CORAM : B.P.Dhamadhikari, J. DATE : 4 th DECEMBER, 2008 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 824/2008 is for direction before this Court. After hearing, it became clear that controversy on merits and the averments in that application are same. Therefore, the matter has been taken up for final hearing by consent of the parties. The Industrial Court by allowing Complaint U.L.P. No. 417/2001 has given the benefit of promotion to present petitioner from 3rd/4th June, 2004. His juniors who were complainant No.3 and Complainant No.4 have been given that benefit from 31.12.2002. In this background, contention of Advocate Jagdale for the petitioner is that though in the cadre of Junior Assistant (Accounts Section) the petitioner was senior to these two persons, because of inadvertant error committed by learned Member of Industrial Court, the petitioner is becoming junior to these persons after promotion. He, therefore, states that petitioner also needs to be given the promotion from 31.12.2002. 2 Advocate Majid Sk. appearing for respondent opposes the grant of prayer. However, I have asked him to point out from the judgment of the Industrial Court as to why date 3rd/4th June, 2004 has been separately given for two persons. The learned Member of Industrial Court has in paragraph 15 found that after promotion of one Diwakar Waghmare (complainant no.5) and before promotion of exempted first employee on 4.6.2004, no person has been promoted. It is in this background, it has given date 3rd/4th June, 2004 as deemed date to the petitioner. It is not in dispute that petitioner was given promotion accordingly on 31.3.2005, though he was declared successful in 1999 examination. It is, therefore, clear that he ought to have been given the said date 31.12.2002 by applying same logic, which has been applied in paragraph 14 while sanctioning said date for Shri Khot and Shri Kalambe. In the circumstances, the inadvertant error needs to be corrected because in seniority list of lower cadre, the name of the petitioner is at Sr.No. 15, while name of Shri Khot is at Sr.No. 27 and name of Shri Kalambe is at sr.No. 34. Accordingly, the civil application and Writ Petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to give 31.12.2002 as deem date of promotion instead of 3rd/4th June, 2004, as directed by the Industrial Court 3 in its impugned order dated 5th January, 2008, to the petitioner. The said order is accordingly corrected only to that extent. Order accordingly. Writ petition as well as civil application are disposed of. No order as to costs. JUDGE Rvjalit