The question which arises for consideration in this writ petition is whether relinquishment of regular promotion by a Government servant and accepted by the competent authority can thereafter be withdrawn by him. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the judgment of a Bench of this court reported in State of Kerala v. Susheela George (2003 (2) KLT 295) and a decision of a learned single Judge in Kumar v. State of Kerala (2002 (2) KLT 630) as affirmed by the Division Bench in W.A.No.1220/02, to contend for the position that if there was a right to relinquish the promotion then there is a concomitant right to withdraw such relinquishment.

2. The petitioner, while working as Upper Division Clerk in the Panchayat Service, was promoted as a first Grade Secretary in 1992. While so, he was further promoted to the post of Junior Superintendent as per the proceedings dated 8.2001 of the Director of Panchayats. According to the petitioner, it was inconvenient for him to accept promotion due to personal reasons. How mother was undergoing treatment due to serious illness and therefore he had temporarily relinquished such promotion for a periods of one year as provided in Rule 38 of the kerala State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules”). By Ext.P1 order, the relinquishment made by the petitioner for a period of one year with effect fro, 8.2001 was accepted.

3. Petitioner submits that even after the expiry of one year, his mother had not recovered from her illness and therefore considering the fact that he had to retire on 33.2004, he filed a representation before the Director, on 6.2002, seeking to extend his relinquishment on a more permanent basis

i.e. from 8.2002 to 33.2004 (the date of his retirement on superannuation). By Ext.P3 order, the Director accepted the petitioner’s relinquishment of promotion to the cadre of Junior Superintendent treating the relinquishment as one made in relation to regular promotion offered to the petitioner on a permanent basis.

.4. Petitioner’s mother expired on 1.2003 and on 27.1.2003 he filed Ext.P4 representation before the Director with a request that taking note of the changed circumstances, he may be promoted as Junior Superintendent pursuant to the offers of promotion made to him earlier. While a decision on Ext.P4 was pending the seniority of persons working in different posts in the Panchayat Department

.was reviewed by the Government. It so happened that, in the revised seniority list, petitioner’s seniority in the cadre of Junior Superintendent was fixed with effect from 7.1997 as against 8.2001, the date on which he was actually promoted as Junior Superintendent, though such promotion had been relinquished by him as mentioned above.

5. Petitioner filed yet another representation before the Director on 9.2003 requesting the Director to confer on him notional seniority in the post of Junior Superintendent after deducting the period of service relinquished by him viz., 8.2001 to 31.2003. There was no reply to this as well. Petitioner refers to Ext.P6 proceedings issued by the Director, publishing a modified list of Junior Superintendents appointed as Secretary prior to 20.10.1993. Apparently petitioner is shown in the cadre of Junior Superintendent. The seniority fixed in the said cadre was with effect from 111.1996.

6. It is the petitioner’s contention that the relinquishment made by him should be treated as a temporary relinquishment and that, at any rate, the said relinquishment should be treated as bereft of all sanctity when the Director himself had reviewed all promotions to the cadre of Junior Superintendent by Ext.P6 though it was subsequent to the acceptance of the petitioner’s relinquishment for promotion on a permanent basis as evidenced by Ext.P3. It is in these circumstances, the petitioner approached this court with the instant writ petition filed on 22.2004, taking note of the fact that the petitioner is impending retireme