( 1. ) THIS order shall dispose of six writ petitions being w. P. No. 2861/2006 (8), W. P. No. 2862/2006 (8), W. P. No. 2863/2006 (8), w. P. No. 2864/2006 (8), W. P. No. 6702/2006 (8) and W. P. No. 310/2007 (8) as the facts in these cases are identical and similar contentions have been raised by the learned counsel for the parties. For the sake of convenience, the facts are borrowed from W. P. No. 2861/2006 (8 ).

( 2. ) THE petitioner-Chhogalal was initially appointed on the post of Proudh shiksha Paryavekshak (hereinafter referred to as Adult Education Supervisor) in the Social Welfare Department of the State Government w. e. f, July 25, 1994. The services of the Adult Education Supervisor were declared surplus and as a result thereof, the said employees were transferred/posted on various posts in the school Education Department. As a matter of fact, the School Education department was even declared their parent department. Subsequently an order dated June 6, 1998 was issued by the State Government, whereby the services of the Adult Education Supervisors, who had earlier been sent to the Education department, were ordered to be absorbed as Upper Division Teachers. A copy of the order dated June 6, 1998 has been appended as Annexure P-3 with the present petition.

( 3. ) A perusal of the order Annexure P-3, however shows that although the absorption of the aforesaid employees had been sanctioned, but the matter of their posting in the concerned districts was left to the Commissioner, Public instructions.

( 4. ) THE petitioner has pleaded that after the absorption order was passed by the State Government, his services were duly absorbed in the Education department of the State Government and as per the settled principles of law, his seniority was fixed at the tail of the seniority of the Upper Division Teachers, existing on the date of absorption. The petitioner has placed the seniority list issued on April 15, 2005, whereby the petitioner has been indicated at serial No. 35 by showing his absorption w. e. f. June 6, 1998 and accordingly his seniority fixed.

( 5. ) IT has also been pleaded by the petitioner that as per the aforesaid seniority position allotted to the petitioner, he was considered for promotion as head Master, Government Middle School and was so promoted w. e. f. , May 20, 2005. The copy of the promotion order has been appended as Annexure P-5 with the present petition. However, later on, on May 4, 2006, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner requiring him to explain as to why his seniority place be not altered, since it had been wrongly given w. e. f. , June 6, 1998, where as he was entitled to be assigned seniority place only from the date of posting. The show cause notice also required the petitioner to explain as to why the promotion order granted to the petitioner be not withdrawn. The petitioner submitted his detailed reply to the show cause notice and defended his assigned place in the seniority list, as well as the promotion granted to him by the Department.

( 6. ) IT was claimed by the petitioner that the due sanction having been granted by the State Government, and the absorption order having been passed on June 6, 1998, the petitioner for all intents and purposes was to be considered an employee of the Education Department and therefore, was entitled to be assigned the due seniority position. The petitioner also defended his promotion made on the basis of said seniority position. However, an order dated May 19, 2006 has been passed by the respondent No. 3, District Education Officer, shajapur, whereby the seniority position of the petitioner assigned to him w. e. f. June 6, 1998 has been withdrawn and the promotion order passed in favour of the petitioner has also been cancelled. The copy of the aforesaid order dated May 19, 2006 passed by respondent No. 3 is Annexure P-1 on the record and is subject matter of challenge by the petitioner before this Court.

( 7. ) THE claim of the petitioner