S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.11419/2009 Ram Singh Rathor Vs. State of Raj. & Ors. DATE OF ORDER : 14.12.2009 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.Sanjay Nahar,for the petitioner. <><><> Petitioner's contention is that he was alleged to have been promoted vide order dated 14.10.2000 after holding the D.P.C. but that order was not communicated to the petitioner. That has been made clear by the respondent's school in its factual report (Annexure 8) dated 02.06.2008. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner though has not been actually promoted, has been denied the selection grade on account of only paper order of promoting and therefore, petitioner submitted his representation for grant of the selection grade and consequential benefits by serving the notice also. Learned counsel for the petitioner drew my attention to the Annexure 8 wherein it has been mentioned that from school record, it is not clear when the petitioner's promotion order was received by the school and further there is a mention that in the service book of the petitioner some alteration have been made by one LDC Bhagwat Singh, against whom enquiry has been initiated. It appears that in the DPC decision taken to promote the number of persons and in that list, petitioner's name is also there. This decision is dated 14.10.2000. In last para at page 34 of the report referred above, it is stated that petitioner was working as ad hoc lecturer in political science from 24.04.1999 and after DPC in the year 1999-2000 he was promoted to the post of lecturer and then consequential order was passed posting petitioner on the post of lecturer in the same school and for that purpose the another order was passed on 30.12.2000. In view of the above reason, it is clear that the petitioner wants to dispute his promotion order dated 14.10.2000. I do not find any just reason for challenging the order of promotion after delay of more than 9 years, which has been acted upon as per the facts mentioned in last para at page 34 in Annexure 8 of the writ petition. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. (PRAKASH TATIA),J. Bharti/-