Biplab Kumar Sharma, J.

1. The claim of the petitioner is that he is senior to the respondent No. 4 and consequently entitled to get promotion to the rank of Superintendent at par with the said respondent. Be it stated here that while the petitioner was promoted as Superintendent in the year 2003 (12.5.2003), the respondent No. 4 was so promoted in the year 2001 (19.7.2001).

2. The petitioner was first appointed as Lower Division Assistant (LDA) pursuant to the selection conducted for the purpose. In the select list prepared and published on 2.3.1977, the name of the petitioner appeared at Sl. No. 6. Be it stated here that the select list was prepared on the basis of merit.

3. The petitioner joined as LDA alongwith 11 others on different dates. The petitioner joined on 4.4.1977 pursuant to the order of appointment issued on 29.3.1977.

4. In the year 1988 (4.6.1988), the petitioner alongwith 4 other LDAs were promoted to the cadre of UD Assistant (UDA). According to the petitioner, as per the seniority maintained, his name appeared at Sl. No. 8 in the cadre of UDA.

5. In the year 2001, the respondent No. 4 alongwith two others were promoted to the cadre of Superintendent by order