1 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.4961/2009 Bhanwar Lal Sharma Vs. The Registrar General & Anr. DATE OF ORDER : 3.8.2009 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr. Sanjeet Purohit, for the petitioner. <><><> Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner was appointed as Class IV employee in the Judgeship of Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act Cases, Jodhpur on 25th June, 1986. The petitioner submits that he is qualified to be promoted to the post of LDC. The petitioner was directed to submit representation upon which the petitioner submitted representation on 13.1.2006. The said representation was rejected by the respondent no.2. It is submitted that instead of giving promotion to the petitioner, the vacant post was filled in by giving appointment to one Sh. Anand Sankhala by transferring him from Udaipur Judgeship. The petitioner's contention is that petitioner should have been given promotion to the post of LDC. I considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the reasons given in the order dated 1st June, 2007 passed by the respondent no.2. The petitioner may have become eligible to the promotional post 2 by virtue of his service experience and educational qualification, but whether to fill in the promotional post by promotion depends upon the discretion of the employer. So far as filling up of the post of LDC by way of transfer from Udaipur Judgeship is concerned, it is not in dispute that one employee can be transferred from one Judgeship to another Judgeship in accordance with rules. In view of the above reasons when there is no vacancy and there is no decision to give promotion on the promotional post then the petitioner cannot have any grievance and cause for filing the writ petition. Hence, the writ petition of the petitioner is dismissed. (PRAKASH TATIA),J. cpgoyal/-