Hon’ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, J.—Heard R.N. Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Pankaj Rai, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

2. By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay the amount of pension and post retiral benefits to him counting his services w.e.f. 3.1.1989 to 31.12.2008.

3. Brief facts giving rise to the present case are that the petitioner applied and was selected on the post of Co-operative Supervisor through proper selection by the Co-operative Commissioner, Lucknow. He was initially appointed as Co-operative Supervisor in District Almora on 6.4.1977 and thereafter, he was posted in various districts and discharged his duty continuously till 3.1.1989. On 3.1.1989 he was promoted on the post of Assistant Development Officer (Co-operative) at Block Bisalpur, District Pilibhit on ad hoc basis. His promotion was made against a clear and substantive post, which was vacant at that time and he continuously worked on the post of A.D.O. (Co-operative) w.e.f. 3.1.1989.

4. On 27.11.1991, the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Lucknow required the name of Co-operative Supervisors for promotion on the post of A.D.O. (Co-operative) from the District Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Pilibhit. In pursuance thereof, the name of the petitioner was sent by the District Assistant Registrar, Co-operative, Pilibhit to the office of Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Lucknow for promotion on the post of ADO (Co-operative). It has been averred in the writ petition that 50% of the posts of A.D.O. (Co-operative)/Inspector Grade-II are filled up by direct recruitment, and 50% post by promotion. The State Government framed Regularization of Ad hoc Promotion Rules, 1988 and according to the said rule, if any employee was promoted on the said post and completed three years’ service continuously, he is entitled for regularization on his promotional post. The petitioner has completed four years’ service on that post and he deemed to be regularizaed on the post of ADO (Co-operative) and is entitled to receive all the benefits of regular employee.

5. By the order dated 9.9.1993 the District Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Pilibhit reverted the petitioner from the post of ADO (Co-operative) to the post of Co-operative Supervisor. Aggrieved by the reversion order dated 9.9.1993 the petitioner filed a Writ Petition No. 39319 of 1993 in which an interim order was passed staying the operation of the order dated 9.9.1993. This Court vide judgment and order dated 16.2.2012 allowed the writ petition with following observations :

“The petitioner was promoted on ad hoc basis as Assistant Development Officer (A.D.O.) in the Co-operative Society on 5.1.1989 initially for a period of 90 days. He was served a notice that the collection of revenue is less than 70%. He was required to improve his collection. The petitioner submitted his reply in which he stated that he improved the collection to more than 80%. The petitioner services have been terminated by the respondents on 9.9.1993 on the ground that promotion was on ad hoc basis. The petitioner in the rejoinder-affidavit has stated that the persons junior to him who were appointed on ad hoc basis have been allowed to continue on the said post, and subsequently been regularised also. The order cancelling the promotion of the petitioner is arbitrary and discriminatory.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

Ad hoc promotion does not create any right in favour of the person who holds such appointments. However, if promotions of several persons are made on ad hoc and some are allowed to continue and others are reverted it suffers vice of discrimination.

The grievance of the petitioner is that he was issued a notice by the respondents that his revenue collection was below to 70% and he was required to improve his revenue collection