The court emphasized the relevance of statutory rules and prior discharge of duties in considering promotions, especially after superannuation.

M. M. Kumar, CJ.--

1. The instant appeal under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent seeks annul­ment of judgment and order dated 24.05.2013 rendered by a learned Single Judge of this Court while dis­missing SWP No. 1170/2012 filed by the appellant. The writ petitioner-appellant has sought directions to respondents to promote him as Chief Enforcement Of­ficer w.e.f 31.10.2010 in the Jammu Municipal Corporation from the post of Enforcement Officer. The vacancy on the post of Chief Enforcement Officer was caused on 31.10.2010 when Sh. Ravi Kant Sharma superannuated. The writ petitioner-appellant, admittedly a senior most Enforcement Officer had represented to the Commissioner, Jammu Municipal Corporation-respon­dent No.2 to promote him to the post of Chief Enforcement Officer keeping in view his qualification, meritorious ser­vice record and seniority. On 10.11.2010, the Commissioner Jammu Municipal Corporation recommended his case for consideration of his pro­motion on the vacant post of Chief En­forcement Officer (Annexure-B). How­ever, the recommendations made by the Commissioner, JMC-respondent No.2 did not find favour with respondent No. 1. The writ petitioner appellant then filed representation for consideration of his case. However, on account of his ensuing superannuation he filed firstly SWP No.287/2012 along with CMA No.399/2012. The Writ Court while is­suing notice to the respondents issued directions on CMA No.399 to consider the case of the writ petitioner appel­lant in accordance with the rules and precedents. Respondents were required to take decision within the notice pe­riod. In terms of Section 67 of the J&K Municipal Corporation Act, 2000, the respondents constituted Departmental Promotion Committee vide order dated 27.04.2011. In its meeting a decision was taken and it was found that the claim of the appellant for promotion di­rectly to the post of Chief Enforcement Office (Chief Khilafwarzi Officer) was not tenable on account of absence of gazetted recruitment rules and he had never discharged duties against the aforesaid post as an incharge incum­bent. Order dated 25.04.2012 was placed on the record of SWP No.287/2012 and the aforesaid writ petition was dismissed by reserving the right of the appellant to re-agitate the matter in view of fresh cause given by or­der dated 25.04.2012. As a consequence SWP No. 1170/2012 relatable to the in­stant appeal was filed challenging or­der dated 25.04.2012.

2. The learned Single Judge has dis­missed the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner-appellant by accepting the stand of the respondents asserting that respondent No.2 had forwarded his case to the Government for consideration for promotion to the post of Chief Enforce­ment Officer vide letter dated 10.11.2010. Thereafter some docu­ments were sought to process the case viz. seniority list of Enforcement Offic­ers, vacancy position and work and con­duct certificate of the writ petitioner-appellant, which were sent to the Hous­ing and Urban Development Depart­ment on 18.12.2010. The Commis­sioner, Jammu Municipal Corporation sent his reply to the representation made by the appellant to the Govern­ment. The learned Single Judge also accepted that prior to coming into force the Jammu and Kashmir Municipal Corporation Act, 2000, the promotions and appointments were being made in accordance with Sections 51 and 52 of the J&K Municipal Act, 2008 (Svt.).After enforcement of J&K Munici­pal Corporation Act, 2000, (for brevity, the Act of 2000) Section 67 of the Act deals with the posts in the Corporation. In view of the provisions of Section 67 of the Act of 2000 selection committee for direct recruitment and Departmen­tal Promotion Committee in the Mu­nicipal Corporation was constituted on 27.04.2011. The Departmental Promo­tion Committee met and rejected the claim of the writ petitioner-appellant to promotion against the vacant post of Chief Enforcement Office (Chief Khilafwarzi Officer) on account of ab­sence of gazet