MOHD SHAFI MATOO Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE undisputed facts are as under:

(2.) THE further fact is that in his capacity as Laboratory Bearer, the petitioner was entitled to promotion as Laboratory Assistant. He was so promoted. This was done on 16.04.2001. Order annexure ËœBâ„¢ in this regard has been placed on the record. The petitioner, however, was not satisfied with this belated promotion.

(3.) THE petitioner filed a writ petition bearing No SWP No: 1026/1996. the petitioner figured as one of the petitioners in the above petition. That writ petition was disposed of on 17.05.2001. A direction was given therein to consider the claims of the petitioners on the same basis as was done in the case of the respondent no.4, in the above writ petition. A copy of the judgment passed in the said writ petition has been placed on the record as annexure ËœCâ„¢. An appeal was preferred by the State. That was dispose of. Thereafter, the respondents have passed an order. This is annexure ËœDâ„¢. It is by this order i.e. annexure ËœDâ„¢ the petitioner is going to be treated as a peon and not as Laboratory Bearer. It is this aspect of the matter which is subject matter of challenge in this petition.