- (1.) THIS petition was filed before this Court on 13. 7. 90 by the petitioner. In para H/i/a it was initially prayed that :-
(2.) "the ACRs for the year 1984-1985, 1986-87, and 1988-89 are all illegal and the same be quashed, so also the orders rejecting representations of the petitioner against the adverse entries. " In para G/i/b it was prayed that :- "respondents may be directed not to place before the Departmental Promotion Committee the adverse entries aforesaid. " In Para G/i/c it was prayed that :- "if for any reason adverse entries are placed before the DPC and DPC rejects the Candidature of the petitioner and consequent appointments are made to the exclusion of the petitioner, the orders making appointments by promotion made may all be declared invalid and may be quashed and the Respondents be directed to give to the petitioner all benefits consequential thereto. " On 16. 7. 90 this Court (Justice Milap Chand Jain, as he then was) issued notice to the other side on the main writ petition and on stay petition passed an ex-parte stay order of keeping one post of Joint Registrar vacant. The said order was confirmed on 15. 10. 1990 till the final disposal of this writ petition. Except this no other interim order was passed in favour of the petitioner. When the petition was filed no representation to the ACR of 1988-89 was made by the petitioner though it was received on 23. 6. 90, but it was stated in the petition that he proposed to make a representation as there was enough time for it. Infact the representation was made lateron i. e. on 24. 7. 90 after filing of the petition by the petitioner, which was also came to be rejected on 6. 12. 1990. In 1991, 12 others were found fit to be promoted by the D. P. C. but the petitioner was not promoted to the post of Joint Registrar. One more adverse entry of 1989-90 was communicated to the petitioner on 13. 1. 1993 against which a representation was made on 2nd March, 1993 which came to be rejected on 10. 6. 1993. Instead of challenging the same by a fresh writ petition the petitioner though it fit to amend the writ petition. The amendment was granted and the amended writ petition is now before this Court. In Para H/i/a it is prayed that : "it may be declared that ACRs for the years 1984-85, 1986- 87, 1988-89 and 1989-90 are all illegal and the same be quashed, so also the orders rejecting representationsof the petitioner against the adverse entrie. " In para H/i/b it is prayed that : "respondents may be directed not to place before the Departmental Promotion Committee the Adverse Entries aforesaid. "
(3.) IN para H/i/c it is prayed that :- "the respondents be directed to accord promotion to the petitioner to the post of Joint Registrar on and from 23. 9. 1991 and respondents may further be directed to give to the petitioner all benefits consequential thereto. " At this stage it may be stated that DPC in its next meeting held for 1993-94 found the petitioner suitable and accordingly he was promoted as Joint Registrar from 5th December, 1994. This fact has come in reply affidavit filed by the respondents. On 22. 10. 1996 an application under Rule 161 of the Rajasthan High Court Rules (for short the Rules) was filed by the petitioner for expeditious disposal. Rule 161 reads as under :- "161. Petition for expeditious disposal. "if a party desires any particular petition or application to be disposed of expeditiously, he should present a separate stamped petition in that behalf and the urgent petition or application will thereupon be placed by the Registrar be- fore the Court, as early as possible. " ;