RAM AUTAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of promotion to the post of Laboratory Attendant from the date his juniors were promoted. The petitioner served a legal notice upon the respondent on 25th March, 1999, Annexure P-2 to the writ petition, claiming the same relief. This request of the petitioner was rejected by the respondent resulting in filing of the present writ petition.

(2.) The request of the petitioner was declined on the ground that petitioner had not acquired the essential eligible qualification of Matric prescribed under the Rules and as respondent No. 4 acquired the said qualification prior to the petitioner, as such he was promoted earlier to the petitioner.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the controversy in the present case is squarely covered by a Division Bench judgment of this Court rendered in the case of Sakur Khan v. The State of Haryana and others being Civil Writ Petition No. 14693 of 1995, where the Division Bench of this Court in similar circumstances held as under :-