The promotion was conditional on passing the examination within the prescribed period, and the petitioner's service until passing the examination cannot be considered for seniority. However, the respondents are estopped from recovering the salary for the period the petitioner worked in the post of Assistant Accounts Officer without being eligible.

F. I. REBELLO, J. :-

Rule. Heard forthwith.

2. Petitioner joined the services of respondent No. 3 as a Junior Accounts Officer by nomination (direct recruitment) w.e.f. 16-5-1997. The petitioner thereafter was promoted to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer by order of 23-10-2003. The order clearly sets out that the petitioner had to pass a departmental examination within two years. Admittedly, the petitioner did not pass the departmental examination within two years from the date of his promotion. The petitioner consequently was reverted to the original post by order of 10-1-2008 with retrospective effect. The petitioner, however, has been again promoted to the said post.

3. By this petition what the petitioner prays is that he should be given his promotion from his initial date of promotion i.e. w.e.f. 23-10-2003 as he has passed the departmental examination within four attempts. The reliefs sought in the petition are to quash the order dated 10-1-2008 by a writ of certiorari and also by issuing a writ of mandamus direct the respondents not to change the seniority of the petitioner and to keep the seniority intact in the cadre of Assistant Accounts Officer from the date of his initial promotion i.e. w.e.f. 23-10-2003.

4. Learned Counsel also points out that by the order dated 10-1-2008, apart from reversion, the salary for the period between his initial date of promotion and subsequent regular promotion, i.e. up to 11-11-2005, is sought to be recovered.

5. According to the petitioner, at the time of consideration for appointment to the post of Junior Accounts Officer, he was holding a degree of M. Com. and as per the Maharashtra Zilla Parishad District Services (Recruitment) Rules, 1967, appointment to the post of Junior Accounts Officer is to be made either by direct recruitment or by promotion. The petitioner was appointed by the process of direct recruitment. The Recruitment Rules further provide that Junior Accounts Officers, if they satisfactorily complete service of three years, are eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer, Grade-I under the Zilla Parishad District Services Class-III (Accounts) Rules. According to the petitioner, as he has completed three years of service as Junior Accounts Officer, he was promoted to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer by order dated 23-10'2003 on a condition that he shall have to pass the departmental examination, namely Maharashtra Zilla Parishad Finance and Accounts Services Class-3 Examination (hereinafter referred to as the Departmental Examination) within a period of two years from the date of the said promotion. It is the further contention Of the petitioner that since then he has been working and discharging his duties as Assistant Accounts Officer.

6. The petitioner thereafter appeared for the Departmental Examination (part-I) held by the Maharashtra Public Service Commission (hereinafter to be referred to as M.P.S.C.) in October, 2004 and successfully passed the same and the result 'thereof was declared by the M.P.S.C. on 20th April, 2005. The petitioner thereafter appeared for Part-II of the Departmental Examination held in the month of November, 2005 and successfully passed the said examination, the result of which came to be declared on 3rd June, 2006.

It may be noted that the petitioner has given details as regards the various attempts he has made for passing the examination. The first attempt was 18th May, 2004 to 21st May, 2004; the second attempt was 18-10-2004 to 21-102004; the third attempt was 26-4-2005 to 29-4-2005 and the fourth attempt was 8-11-2005 to 11-11-2005. In these four attempts the petitioner has passed the said examination.

7. The submission of-the petitioner is that the departmental examination ordinarily used to be held in the month of October and if the said examination would have been held in October, 2005, the petitioner could have passed the said examination. However, the examination was held in November, 2005 and