A. N. Dikshita, J. - (1.) By means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner has prayed for issuing a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 and 2 not to declare the result of the selection held on 23-7-1984 as well as for a direction to consider the case of the petitioner along with the other Excise Inspectors for promotion to the post of Excise Superintendent and to decide the representations of the petitioner (annexures 2, 4 and 7 to the petition) at the earliest.
(2.) Briefly stated the facts as set out in the petition are. The petitioner is working as an Excise Inspector in the Department of U.P. Excise having been recruited directly to the post on 22-6-1961. During his posting as Excise Inspector in Bansgaon, District Gorakhpur, the petitioner was awarded adverse entries in his character roll for the periods 1973-74, 1974-75 and 1975-76 which were communicated to him on various dates. The petitioner made representations against the aforesaid adverse entries. Such representations are still pending and have not yet been decided by the respondents. However, in spite of the adverse entries for three consecutive years the petitioner was allowed to cross the Efficiency Bar with effect from the year 1978 by an order passed sometime in 1982.
(3.) A selection for the posts of Excise Superintendents took place on 2-8-1983 but the petitioner's suitability for promotion was not considered owing to the adverse remarks awarded to him and which could not be wiped off due to non-consideration of the petitioner's representations. Twenty-four posts were to be filled by promotion. Out of these only 14 posts were filled. Amongst these promotees 7 persons were senior to the petitioner and 7 persons were junior to the petitioner. In the gradation list dated 31-13-1982 the petitioner was placed at serial No. 141. Further two more persons were promoted and these two also were junior to the petitioner. Again a selection committee held its deliberations on 23-7-1984 to consider for second time the matter of depertmental promotion from the posts of Excise Inspectors to the posts of Excise Superintendents. The petitioner was again not considered by the selection committee due to the adverse entries in his character roll against which representations were made but were pending. The petitioner's grievance is that he having been allowed to cross the Efficiency Bar was bound to be considered by the selection committee for promotion to the posts of Excise Superintendent.;