8.4.2009 Present: Mr. N. D. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Vivek Thakur, Addl. A. G. and Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. A.G. for respondents No. 1 & 2. CWP(T) 2980/2008 (OA No. 268/96 Petitioner has assailed the order dated 28.12.1995 (Annexure A-2), whereby private respondents were promoted as Kanungo. It is his grievance that in the seniority list circulated in the year 1993, he was placed at Sl. No. 177 but, however, private respondents who were junior to him and were placed at Sl. Nos. 355, 221, 356, 358, 232, 236 & 303, were promoted as Kanungo in terms of the impugned order. The respondents-State in their reply have categorically stated that in the department of Consolidation, Settlement and Revenue Districts, Patwaris constitute a separate District cadre. Promotion under challenge pertains to District Kangra which has a District cadre. Petitioner herein passed his Patwar examination in the year 1971 but, however, joined the District cadre only in the year 1980. Petitioner belongs to general category and vide impugned orders only those persons who were senior to him in the general category were promoted as Kanungo. The private respondents belonging to the reserved category were promoted keeping in view the fact that some of the vacancies had to be filled up by promotion from the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe categories as per regular circle of 40% promotion. It is evident that the private respondents who were junior to the petitioner and placed as such in the seniority list belonged to the reserved category and, therefore, were fully entitled for being considered for promotion in their own right. Nothing has been shown as to how and in what manner the Recruitment and Promotion Rules stand violated. As such, I find no reason to interfere in the present petition and the same being devoid of any merit is dismissed. ( Sanjay Karol ), Judge. April 8, 2009 (rana)