JUDGMENT :

Namit Kumar, J. (Oral)

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of Accountant, which is lying vacant since 2015, retrospectively from the date when she became eligible.

2. The brief facts as have been pleaded in the petition are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Auction Recorder on 20.09.1983 and was further promoted to the post of Mandi Supervisor-cum-Fees Collector vide order dated 02.05.2013 and the next channel of promotion is to the post of Accountant and the said post became vacant in the year 2015 and the petitioner was given the current duty charge of the vacant post of Accountant on 21.03.2016. The post of Accountant is filled 100% by promotion from amongst the Mandi Supervisors-cum-Fees Collectors, who have an experience of three years and have qualified the departmental examination. The petitioner passed the departmental examination on 06.06.2016 and became eligible for promotion and submitted a representation dated 04.11.2019, claiming promotion to the post of Accountant, however, she was not given promotion to the said post. Hence, this writ petition.

3. Written statement on behalf of respondents No.2 to 4 has been filed wherein it has been stated that the petitioner passed the departmental examination on 06.06.2016, which was required for promotion to the post of Accountant and she never approached respondent No.4 for her promotion to the post of Accountant. During the service tenure of the petitioner, a letter dated 02.12.2016, was served upon the petitioner to take the charge of the post of Accountant and to give clarification regarding the pending work but the petitioner refused to receive the same and she orally requested that she does not want to take charge of the post of Accountant due to her bad health. Respondent No.4 again vide letter dated 06.01.2017, directed the petitioner to take charge of the post of Accountant as she was senior most employee but she again refused to receive the said letter. The petitioner was due to retire on 31.01.2020 and, vide letter dated 04.11.2019, she approached respondent No.4, for her promotion to the post of Accountant just to get the retirement benefits on the post of Accountant. Thereafter, the case of the petitioner was considered and she was promoted to the post of Accountant vide order dated 31.01.2020.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner was eligible for promotion, therefore, she was required to be promoted to the said post from the date of occurrence of vacancy in the year 2015 or at least on 06.06.2016, when she passed the departmental examination and the action of the respondents in promoting the petitioner only w.e.f. 31.01.2020 instead of 06.06.2016, is totally illegal and arbitrary and, therefore, a direction may be issued to the respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of Accountant from 06.06.2016.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for respondents No.3 and 4 submit that the petitioner has no vested right of promotion with effect from the date, she became eligible for promotion and it is the employer to decide as and when the promotional post is to be filled. He further submits that in the present case, the petitioner even avoided to take charge of the post of Accountant and at the fag end, she submitted a representation on 04.11.2019, claiming promotion to the post of Accountant, and she has been promoted on 31.01.2020 and, therefore, the instant petition has been rendered infructuous.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7. The facts are not in dispute that the petitioner initially joined as Auction Recorder on 20.09.1983 and was further promoted to the post of Mandi Supervisor-cum-Fees Collector on 02.05.2013 and she became eligible for promotion to the post of Accountant on 06.06.2016, when she passed the departm