- (1.) The petitioner has prayed for modification of the order dated 16.07.2009 passed in the W.P.(S) No. 3887 of 2009 whereby, while disposing of the writ application, this court had directed the concerned authorities of the respondents to consider the petitioner's candidature for his promotion against the future vacancy in class-III post in accordance with the prescribed Rules.
(2.) Counsel for the petitioner submits that at the time when the case was being argued and the order was passed, the respondents have suppressed the fact that one vacancy did exist even on the date of the order. The petitioner unfortunately was not aware of this fact and therefore, could not promptly point out before this court and consequently, the direction referred to above, came to be passed by this court in the said writ application. Learned counsel submits that in the counter affidavit filed by the respondents in the review application, the respondents have acknowledged the fact that even on the date when the writ application was disposed of, there existed one vacancy in class-III post.
(3.) Counsel for the respondents would want to clarify that on the date when the writ application was filed by the petitioner, there existed a vacancy, but does not confirm as to whether on the date when the final order was passed in the writ application, there existed any vacancy in class-III post.;