- (1.) In this writ petition the grievance of the writ petitioner is that he has not been given promotion in the next higher post though the respondent Nos. 4 to 35, who are juniorto the petitioner have been given promotion illegally and arbitrarily.
(2.) The petitioner is an Instructor, Railway Protection Force and he has been posted at Sini under Chakradharpur Division in the District West Singbhum, Bihar. The petitioner initially joined as Sub-inspector (Executive) and he was appointed directly by the Railway Service Commission and had undergone initial post training in the year 1976-1977. The petitioner was posted in a working post w.e.f. 27.03.1977 as Sub-Inspector.
(3.) The petitioner is senior in the length of service as Sub-Inspector to the respondent Nos. 4 to 35. In Paragraph 6 of the writ petition the petitioner has given the date of promotion of the respondent Nos, 4 to 35 respectively. According to the petitioner he is senior to the respondent Nos. 4 to 35 in length of service. Chapter-10, Paragraph-10 of Railway Protection Force Regulations, 1966 (hereinafter termed as said regulation) runs as follows:- "10. The directly recruited candidates hall have to execute the agreement as given in Appendix-A of the R.P.F. Rules before joining the training school and shall be designated as an "S.I.Cadet" until he has successfully completed the training. There was stipulation that while under training he will be entitled to the payment of 'Stipend' in accordance with Board's letter No. P.C. 59/PS-9/B/3, dated 01.04.1963. The date of his appointment will be the date on which he is appointed against a working post after successful completion of his training." Accordingly, the petitioner was appointed as Sub-inspector (Executive) after successful completion of training. According to the petitioner it is therefore also clear that as a direct recruited candidate the date of appointment of the petitioner is the date on which he is appointed against a working post.;