CWP(T) No.2531 of 2008. 12.05.2009 Present: Ms. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.K. Sharma, Senior Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Vikas Rathore, Deputy Advocate General for the respondents. Ms. Ranjana Parmar has confined her submission only to one aspect that there is no promotional avenue to the petitioner. This fact is not disputed by the learned Senior Additional Advocate General. However, his only submission is that the petitioner could not be promoted to the higher post since the post in question is single cadre post. It is settled law by now that for every category of employees there must be promotional avenues during the service. This position has been explained by their Lordships of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Food Corporation of India and others Vs. Parshotam Das Bansal and others, (2008) 5 SCC 100. Their Lordships have held that the promotional avenue removes stagnation and increases efficiency in public service. Their Lordships have further held that in such cases the higher Courts can issue directions to the State/employer to frame a scheme for providing promotional avenues to those categories who have been deprived of this privilege. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to frame a scheme for providing suitable promotional avenues to the petitioner within a period of ten weeks from today. Rest of the codal formalities are permitted to be completed by the State/respondents. With these observations, the petition is disposed of. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), J. May 12, 2009. (sck)