R.S. Mongia, J. - (1.) The writ-petitioner, Shri Satya Parkash Vasudeva (now respondent), who is working as a Deputy Superintendent in the Irrigation Department of the Haryana State, had filed a writ petition challenging his seniority in the rank of Deputy Superintendent. During the pendency of the writ petition, vide order dated 1st December, 1988, the seniority was revised by the Government itself and the petitioner was placed at Serial No. 13, while respondent No. 3 Shri Chetan Dass was placed at Serial No. 14 in the seniority list. Prior to the revision of the seniority list on 1st December, 1988, another seniority list in the year 1985 had been issued, in which petitioner was shown at Serial No. 58 and respondent Nos. 3 and 4 at serial No. 51 and 23 respectively. This seniority list issued in the year 1985 was not challenged by the writ petitioner.
(2.) The learned Single Judge in the penultimate para had observed that "Since the petitioner has been assigned fresh seniority over respondent No. 4 his deemed date of promotion will be from the date respondent No. 4 was promoted". The State Government and some other persons who get themselves impleaded in this Letters Patent Appeal, felt dissatisfied with the judgment of the learned Single Judge only to the extent that in the above quoted observations instead of respondent No. 4 it should be read as respondent No. 3, inasmuch as respondent No. 4 had already been declared senior to the petitioner in the year 1985 and that was not under challenge before the learned Single Judge and in the year 1988, the petitioner was placed senior to respondent No. 3 only and not respondent No. 4.
(3.) We find force in the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants that in fact the writ-petitioner could be assigned the deemed date of promotion of respondent No. 3 and not of respondent No. 4. In fact, the writ petitioner Shri Satya Parkash Vasudeva had filed an affidavit in the Court that let him be assigned the deemed date of promotion as Deputy Superintendent as that of respondent No. 3, i.e. 12th November, 1980 and judgment of the learned Single Judge be modified to that extent. In view of the stand taken by the writ-petitioner, we hold that Shri Satya Parkash Vasudeva, writ-petitioner, (now respondent) is entitled to be considered for promotion to the rank of Deputy Superintendent with effect from the date respondent No. 3 i.e. Shri Chetan Dass was promoted as such i.e. 12th November, 1980. Let this be done within two months. If the petitioner is found suitable for promotion with effect from 12th November, 1980, needless to mention that he will be entitled to all consequential benefits like arrears of pay etc. which would be given to the petitioner within one month from the date of the passing of the passing of the order of his promotion. The judgment of the learned Single Judge is modified to that extent.;