JUDGMENT M. Katju and Rakesh Tiwari, JJ.
1. Heard Sri A. P. Sahi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pushpendra Singh, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The petitioner is challenging the impugned order dated 16.2.2001 (Annexure-7 to the writ petition).
3. We have carefully examined the impugned order and find no illegality in the same.
4. The petitioner was refused to be promoted from Class III to Class 11 in the educational service. He was charge-sheeted and his result was kept in a sealed cover and subsequently, he was punished and was not promoted for the recruitment year 1994-1995.
5. Subsequently, the petitioner was promoted for the recruitment year 1998-99. We see no illegality in the impugned order, since the petitioner has been found guilty and was not found fit for promotion at that time. The criteria of promotion is seniority subject to rejection of unfit. Since he was found guilty of misconduct in an enquiry, he was rightly not found fit at that time.
6. The petition is dismissed.