WPSS No. 159/2010 Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala J. Mr. Manoj Tiwari, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. M. C. Pant, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Subhash Upadhyay, the learned brief holder for the State. The petitioner is praying for promotion as a Lecturer in English under the 50% quota and for the quashing of the order of the promotion of respondent no.5 on the post of Lecturer in Hindi as well as for the quashing of the advertisement issued on 17th February, 2010 for filling up the post of Lecturer by way of direct recruitment. From a perusal of the record, it transpires that there are five posts of Lecturer in the institution and that three posts are required to be filled up by way of promotion and two by direct recruitment. It has also been stated that two posts had already been filled up by way of promotion in the year 1993 and the third promotion on the post of lecturer in Hindi was filled up by a resolution dated 11.11.2005(annexure 10 to the writ petition). The petitioner contends that the promotion of respondent no.5 as a Lecturer in Hindi was illegal and therefore, that order should be set aside. Upon the setting aside of that order, one post of Lecturer would become vacant in which the petitioner being eligible could be promoted as a Lecturer in English and consequently, the advertisement for filling up the post of Lecturer in English by direct recruitment should also be stayed. In my opinion, the imagination of the petitioner has been stretched a very long way. In my opinion the petitioner is not entitled for any relief at this belated stage. The petitioner cannot question the order of promotion of respondent no.5. at this belated stage after more than five years. Since that order cannot be questioned at this stage, the other relief for promotion of the petitioner on the post of Lecturer in English under 50% quota obviously cannot be granted. Since there are no further posts in the institution, which could be filled up by way of promotion, the advertisement so issued does not suffer from any illegality. The writ petition is dismissed summarily. (Tarun Agarwala, J.) Dated: 22.3.2010 Nishant