CWP No.13274 of 1994 Date of decision : 31.1.2011 Tarvinder Kumar and others Vs. State of Punjab and others. Present: Mr.A.S.Khaira, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms.Anu Pal, AAG, Punjab. * * * Permod Kohli, J. Petitioners in this case are working as revenue patwaries. The next promotion is from the post of Patwari to the post of Kanungo, which is governed by the statutory rules, namely, Punjab Kanungos Service (State Service Class-III) Rules, 1976, which inter alia prescribes that 75% of the appointment to the post of Kanungoes are to be made by the promotion from amongst the Patwari Moharrir and Patwari of the District and 25% by direct appointment. During the subsistence of the statutory rules, govt. issued instructions vide memo dated 20.12.1982 dispensing with the holding of proficiency and suitability test for promotion to the post of Kanungo. Petitioners have challenged the aforesaid circular in this petition with a further relief to consider the petitioners for promotion to the post of Kanungo in accordance with the statutory rules. Learned counsel for the petitioners has referred to judgment dated 29.3.1995 passed in CWP No.6849 of 1994 whereby the same circular has been quashed. The relevant observations made in the aforesaid judgment are as under:- [i] “The instructions issued by the Government vide letter dated December 20,1982 are not in conformity with the Rules. These are, consequently, quashed. The promotions which have been made during the pendency of these petitions without holding a test, are illegal. These will now be made on the result of a test to be held in accordance with the provisions of the 1976 Rules. All CWP No.13274 of 1994 the vacancies which may have occurred during the pendency of these petitions upto November 8,1994, shall be filled up on the basis of this test. (ii) The respondents are directed to hold a test in respect of these vacancies and promotions made during the pendency of these petitions, are set aside. All the writ petitions except Civil Writ Petition No.16858 of 1994, are allowed in the above terms. No costs. Sd/-Jawahar Lal Gupta Judge March 29,1995.” Since the same circular has already been quashed, this petition is disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgment. Petitioners shall be entitled to the same relief. ( Permod Kohli ) Judge 31.01.2011 sd 2