WP(C) 2849/2005 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B. K. SHARMA Heard Mr. N. Dhar, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. A. Verma, learned Standing Counsel, Health Department. The petitioner is aggrieved by the Annexure-7 order dated 19.3.2005, by which the respondent No. 4 was promoted to the post of Statistical Assistant. Ac cording to the petitioner, he being senior to the said respondent, ought to have been considered for such promotion. Although, the writ petition was admitted on 12.4.2005, the respondents d id not file any counter affidavit till 3.2.2011. It was only after the order pas sed on 1.2.2011, by which it was provided that in case of failure to respond to the proceeding, no further time would be allowed, the respondent No.2 filed the counter affidavit on 3.2.2011 in which it was admitted that the case of the peti tioner was over-looked. As recorded in the order dated 15.2.2011, in the said affidavit it has b een stated that since the matter is quite old, it is become difficult to trace o ut the old records and to gather the reasons as to why the case of the petitione r did not come under consideration. It has also been stated that in the matter o f administration, some issues may be over-looked from the purview of considerati on. In view of the aforesaid stand in the counter affidavit filed by one Dr. Niranjan Kalita, Deputy Director of Health Services (Ayrur), Assam, the Directo r of Health Services was given personal appearance to explain the circumstances. On 8.3.2011, the Director of Health Services appeared in person and expr essed his regret in mechanically signing the parawise comments that was prepared in the Office, on the basis of which the aforesaid counter affidavit was filed. By order dated 28.2.2011, the petitioner has also been promoted to the post of Statistical Assistant in the Office of the Joint Director of Health Services, Ka rimganj. Since the petitioner was superseded in the matter of promotion, he clai med retrospective promotion at par with his junior i.e. the respondent No.4. Ms. A. Verma, learned Standing Counsel, Health, has produced the letter dated 8.8.2011 addressed to the learned Standing counsel, Health Department, by the Director of Health Services conveying the approval for promotion of the peti tioner with retrospective effect i.e. the date on which the respondent No.4 was so promoted. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of directing the res pondents, more particularly, the Director of Health Services, Assam to grant ret rospective promotion to the petitioner from the date when his junior i.e. the re spondent No.4 was so promoted. Since the petitioner did not shoulder the responsibility of the higher p ost in the interregnum, it is made clear that he is not entitled for any back wa ges but his pay should be fixed notionally in the promotional post for all other purposes. With the above directions and observations, the writ petition stands dis posed of, without however, any order as to costs.