JUDGMENT :

RAJESH BINDAL, J.

1. The present intra-court appeal has been filed by the respondent No. 3 in the writ petition, challenging the order passed by learned Single Judge whereby the writ petition filed by respondent No. 1 herein was allowed.

2. The respondent No. 1 herein filed the writ petition challenging the order dated 27.04.2011, whereby the present appellant was promoted as Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychiatry. Further prayer was made to fill up the post on regular basis as per rules. Learned Single Judge while recording certain finding on the eligibility of respondent No. 1, allowed the writ petition and directed the official respondents to take further steps. Aggrieved against the aforesaid order present intra-court appeal has been filed by the respondent No. 3 in the writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant was selected and appointed as lecturer in the Department of Psychiatry on 08.04.2008 and being eligible to be promoted in terms of The Jammu and Kashmir Medical Education (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1979 (for short ‘the 1979 Rules’) was promoted on In-charge basis as Assistant Professor in the Psychiatry Department. Without there being any basis and the respondent No. 1 being not even in the feeder cadre for promotion to the post of Assistant Professor, challenged his promotion. The respondent No. 1 was appointed as Lecturer (Clinical Psychologist Non-Medical) on 09.07.1998. The qualifications required for recruitment to the post of Lecturer (Clinical Psychologist Non-Medical) are altogether different as compared to the qualifications required for promotion to the post of Assistant Professor. As per the 1979 Rules only a lecturer in Psychiatry with three years experience is eligible. As the respondent No. 1 was not working as lecturer in Psychiatry he was not eligible to be considered for the post. In fact the writ petition was totally misconceived. The appellant had been promoted as Assistant Professor on In-charge basis vide order dated 27.04.2011 on which date the respondent No. 1 did not even have the requisite qualification required for the post of Assistant Professor. She got her Ph.D. degree in May, 2011.

4. Learned counsel had further referred to General Notes appended with the 1979 Rules in support of his argument that candidate having medical qualification is only eligible to be considered and promoted as Assistant Professor in Psychiatry. The respondent No. 1 had obtained her Ph.D. degree in Clinical Psychology. The two subjects are altogether different as for promotion to the post of Assistant Professor in Psychiatry she will not be eligible.

5. On the other hand learned counsel for the State submitted that after discussing the issues the learned Single Judge has left it to the authorities to consider and take a decision regarding promotion to the post of Assistant Professor, hence, the appellant did not have any cause of action to file the present appeal. He further submitted that though there are qualifications prescribed for promotion from the post of lecturer to senior positions in the hierarchy but even the candidate with equivalent qualification is also eligible. He further submitted that in Note 5 in the General Notes appended with the 1979 Rules it is clearly mentioned that equivalent qualification referred in the schedule is to be determined by the Government in consultation with the Medical Council of India.

6. Mr. Sunil Sethi, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1 submitted that the argument of the appellant that lecturer in Psychiatry and lecturer (Clinical Psychologist Non-Medical) are two different posts, is totally fallacious. Both are working as lecturers in the Department of Psychiatry. And for promotion to the post of Assistant Professor in Psychiatry both are eligible. He further referred to senio