WP(C) 4168/2009 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. K. SHARMA Heard Mr. D.C. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. S. Samaria, learned Standing Counsel, Agriculture. This writ petition has been filed making a grievance against non-promoti on of the petitioners to the post of Marketing Inspector at per with their junio rs, who have been promoted to the said post. There is no denial of the fact that the petitioners are senior to some of the officers who have been promoted to th e post of Marketing Inspector. However, the stand of the respondents is that the said juniors have been so promoted pursuant to the judgement and order dated 3. 2.2005 passed in a batch of writ petitions, being WP(C) No. 737/2000 (Shri Sidde shwar Deka Vs. State of Assam and others). It is the specific case of the petiti oner and it is also revealed from the Gradation List circulated on 27.4.2004 (A nnexure-4) that the petitioner in WP(C) 4165/2009 is senior to Shri Biju Phukan Boro and Shri Subhash Saha, who were junior to the petitioners in the said batc h of writ petition whereas Shri Rajon Ali Borbhuiya and Shri Shyam Sundar Dutta were junior to the petitioners in WP(C) 4167/2009 and WP(C) 4168/2009 respectiv ely, promoted to the post of Marketing Inspector. In the Gradation List, the petitioner’s name in WP(C) 4165/2009 appears at Sl. No. 15 and that of Shri Biju Phukan Boro and Shri Subhash Saha at Sl. No. 16 and 28. Said Shri Biju Phukan Boro and Shri Subhash Saha were the petitioner s in WP(C) 768/2000 and 1529/2000. In the writ petitions, it was the allegation that the juniors to the sai d petitioners had been promoted to the post of Marketing Inspector to the depri vation of the seniors. Accordingly, while disposing of the writ petitions by the aforesaid judgement and order, direction was issued for promotion of the petiti oners applying the principle of Next Below Rule . Pursuant to the aforesaid judgement and order, the Chief Executive Offic er of the respondent Marketing Board, issued the order dated 4.12.2005 promoting aforesaid said Shri Biju Phukan Boro and Shri Subhash Saha. It appears that af ter the aforesaid judgement and order, some other writ petitions were also filed and the said writ petitions were also disposed of in terms of the aforesaid jud gement and order. Mention may be made of WP(C) 3699/2002 (Rajen Ali Borbhuiya Vs . State of Assam & Ors), which was disposed of by order dated 16.12.2006. In ter ms of the said order, the authority issued the Annexure-9 order dated 29.1.2007 promoting said Shri Rajen Ali Borbhuiya, Account Assistant to the post of Market ing Inspector. Be it stated here that the petitioner in WP(C) No. 4167/2009 apa rt from being senior to all the aforesaid incumbents is also working in the post of Accountant, stated to be higher in rank than that of the Account Assistant. Mr. D.C. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner has also drawn my at tention to the subsequent orders of promotion passed by the authorities on the b asis of the orders passed by this court. However, since the petitioners, althoug h senior to most of the aforesaid beneficiaries, have not been promoted, they h ave approached this court by filling the instant writ petitions. As regards seni ority above the juniors, statements have been made in paragraph 9, 10, 11, 12, 1 3, 14 and 17 of WP(C) No. 4167/2009. In the counter affidavit, the respondents have not denied the fact that the petitioners are senior to the persons named in the said paragraphs including said Shri Biju Phukan Boro and Shri Subhash Saha. Only plea of the respondents is that the case of the petitioners has not been considered in view of the fact that in the mean time, the respondent Board has adopted a bye-law in the year 20 07 regulating the promotion. The respondents have also referred to the order dat ed 2.7.2009 passed in Review Petition No. 4/2008. The said Review Petition was f iled by the respondent Board seeking review of one of the order passed by this c ourt following the aforesaid judgement and order dated 3.2.2005. The Review Peti tion was filed in respect of the order dated 23.2.2007 passed in WP(C) No. 853/2 007 (Nripen Chandra Deb Nath and 2 Ors. Vs. State of Assam and others). In the Review Petition, it was the contention of the respondents that since in the mean time the Board has adopted the bye-law in 2007, the procedure of promotion envi saged in the said bye-law would be applicable and thus the earlier direction of this court was required to be reviewed. While disposing of the Review Petition, this court duly took note of the fact that the bye-law came into effect from 1.4.2007. The petitioners having be en deprived to their promotion of the post of Marketing Inspector as per the ear lier prevalent practice and procedure, the said bye-law cannot take away the ves ted right of the petitioners. In fact, the said judgement and order dated 3.2.20 05 was rendered in the fact-situation that the juniors to the petitioners had be en promoted to the post of Marketing Inspector without considering the seniors. In the instant case, although the petitioners are senior to all the afor ementioned officers including the writ petitioners involved in various writ peti tions, the respondent Board has not considered their case for promotion at par w ith their juniors. In fact, the respondent Board ought to have considered the ca se of the petitioners without requiring them to approach this court. However, du e to the apathy shown by the respondents in the matter, the petitioners were for ced to approach this court. For all the aforesaid reasons, I have no hesitation to allow the writ pe titions in terms of the said judgement and order dated 3.2.2005 referred to abov e and all other subsequent orders. Writ petitions are allowed. Consequential orders in terms of this order shall be passed by the respondents without any delay.