WP(C) 133/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA.. The matter pertains to the prayer of the petitioner for promotion as Secretary o f the Gaon Panchayat. The petitioner has also prayed for setting aside and quas hing the Annexure-6 office order dated 26.2.2009, by which the Respondents No.4 and 5 have been promoted as Secretary. Mr. R. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this case is covered by the order dated 13.9.2010 passed in WP(C) No.1507/2009 followed by order dated 27.9.2010 passed in WP(C) No.2129/2009. By the said orders, it has been provided that the case of the petitioners involved therein may be considere d taking note of the particular stand of the respondents in their counter affida vit. The said stand was reflected in paragraph 10 of the counter affidavit file d by the Chief Executive Officer, Cachar Zilla Parishad, Silchar which is quoted below :- 10. That the deponent further states and submit that as directed by the Depu ty Secretary to the Govt. of Assam. Panchayat and Rural Development Department, Assam vide W.T. No.PDA-84/2009/6 dated 4.6.2010 and as per records the petitione rs were appointed as T.C/R.M. in provincialized set up and included in the senio rity list prepared by the Commissioner, Panchayat and Rural Development Departme nt, Assam, out of the seniority list some of T.C/R.M promoted as Gaon Panchayat Secretary against the vacant post of Secretary. At present under Cachar Zilla Pa rishad out of 163 Nos. of Gaon Pancyayats 126 Nos. of Secretaries are existing a nd 37 Nos. posts of Gaon Panchayat Secretaries are lying vacant. As per seniorit y list the petitioners of the writ petition may get due consideration for promot ion to the post of Secretary against existing vacant posts. Ms R. Chakraborty, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate submits that since t he aforesaid two orders were passed in the fact situation of those two cases, sa me may not be applicable to all other cases, more particularly, when it may so h appen that the seniority of the petitioner may not permit to get promotion. Without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case of the petitione r, this writ petition is disposed of providing that the respondents may examine as to whether the case of the petitioner is covered by the said two orders. If u pon such examination, it is found that it is so covered, the respondents may do the needful in the matter without, however, disturbing the promotion of the Resp ondents No.4 and 5, which has been put to challenge in this writ petition. In ot her words, the impugned order dated 26.2.2009 (Annexure-6 to the writ petition) is not interferred with. With the above direction and observation, the writ petition is disposed of.