C.S. Dharmadhikari, J. - (1.)IN this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the promotion of the respondents Nos, 3 and 4 whereby they were promoted as Divisional Joint Registrar, Co -operative Societies, in the month of February 1972. According to the petitioner, the criterion for promotion is one of seniority -CM/n -merit. It is contended by the petitioner that according to the gradation list of Class II officers be is senior to the respondents Nos. 3 and 4. Subsequently by an order dated 15 -9 -1971 he was permitted to cross the efficiency bar with effect from 1 -4 -1968 itself, and in spite of this order passed by the Government his case was not considered for promotion when the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 were promoted on 18 -2 -1972. Hence their promotions are violative of his fundamental right guaranteed under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
(2.)IT is also contended by the petitioner that the confidential record for a period prior to 1 -4 -1968 could not now be taken into consideration by the Government while making further promotions in view of the order passed by the Government on 15 -9 -1971 permitting him to cross the efficiency bar with effect from 1 -4 -1968. He further contended that his service record after 1968 is excellent and, therefore, he was entitled to be considered for promotion when the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 were promoted as Divisional Joint Registrar, Co -operative Societies.
Apart from these allegations, the petitioner has made various other allegations in the petition challenging even the promotion of one Shri B. N. Chavan who was promoted to the post of Joint Registrar, Co -operative Societies, by an order dated 2 -1 -1970 and of one Shri Ishaquiddin and one Shri Pappoo who were also promoted as Joint Registrar, Co -operative Societies,, on 11 -11 -1970. However, it is not necessary to make a detailed reference to those allegations in this petition because neither Shri Chavan nor Shri Ishaquiddin nor Shri Pappoo are joined as parties to this petition and, therefore, their promotions cannot now be challenged by the petitioner in this writ petition filed in 1972 and that too without joining them as parties.

(3.)MR . Manohar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, therefore, confined his arguments to the promotions of the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 who were promoted to the post of Divisional Joint Registrar, vide order dated 18 -2 -1972. According to Mr. Manohar, as all adverse remarks in the confidential record of the petitioner prior to 1968 cannot now be taken into consideration in view of the subsequent order passed by the Government on 15 -9 -1971 permitting him to cross the efficiency bar and as his further record is good, by not considering him for promotion in the year 1972 when the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 were promoted as Divisional Joint Registrar, his fundamental right guaranteed under Article 16 is wholly violated and, therefore, the said promotions are liable to be set aside. However, having regard to the fact that subsequent to the filing of the petition, in the year 1973 the petitioner himself was promoted as Divisional Joint Registrar, Mr. Manohar has confined his arguments praying for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 to consider the case of the petitioner together with the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 as in February 1972 and then grant him a deemed dale and consequential reliefs in accordance with law. Therefore, Mr. Manohar is not now praying for issue of a writ of mandamus for quashing the promotions of the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 in toto.