IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CWP (T) 11524 of 2008 Decided on: August 2, 2011 Dr.B.M. Gupta ..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. .. Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Dilip Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Assistant Advocate General. Surjit Singh, Judge (oral) Petitioner was working as Medical Officer in the Health Department, in the year 2003, when there were 20 vacancies of Chief Medical Officers. Though petitioner’s seniority was much lower than many other Medical Officers, he claims that on account of his having passed departmental examination and fulfilling other eligibility criteria, he was eligible for consideration for promotion to the post of Chief Medical Officer and some other Medical Officers, who were senior to him and were considered/sought to be considered for such promotion, were ineligible, because of their having not passed departmental examination or on account of their not falling Whet her report ers of t he l ocal papers may be al l owed t o see t he j udgment ? É2É in the exemption clause, which provides that those members of the cadre, who have crossed the age of 55 years, are exempt from passing departmental examination. 2. Respondents, in their reply, have taken the plea that in the seniority list, petitioner’s name was at Sr. No. 462 and that against the vacancies, which were available in the year 2002, candidates three times the number of vacancies, were required to be considered and, therefore, petitioner being not among the first 60 candidates, was not considered for promotion to the post of Chief Medical Officer. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as also learned Assistant Advocate General and gone through the relevant record. 4. It is not the case of the respondents that petitioner had not passed the departmental examination or was not eligible for being considered for promotion. Also, the respondents do not deny that those, who were considered for promotion, had not passed the departmental examination nor were they exempt from passing departmental examination, on account of their having crossed the age of 55 years. That means, the respondents considered for promotion, the persons, who were otherwise ineligible. If that is so, their action, on the face of it, is illegal and, hence, unsustainable. Only the eligible persons É3É were required to be considered for promotion, irrespective of their placement in the seniority list. As a matter of fact, 60 senior most eligible persons, that is to say, who had either passed the departmental examination or had crossed the age of 55 years, were required to be considered for the vacancies. 5. View, which has been taken hereinabove, finds support from a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Dr. Satish Rathore Vs. State of H.P. and others, 2002 (3) Shim. LC 59. 6. In view of the above stated position, writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to review the Departmental Promotion Committee for promotions to the vacant posts of Chief Medical Officers available in the year 2003, and subsequent thereto, and to consider the petitioner for promotion for the said post, in case his name figures among the number of eligible persons, required to be considered for the available vacancies. This direction be complied with by 30th November, 2011. Disposed of. August 2, 2011 (ss) (Surjit Singh), J.