I.M. Quddusi, J.
1. The Petitioner who was a Judicial Officer being aggrieved by his non-promotion to the rank of Subordinate Judge has filed this Writ Petition praying for a direction to the Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 2 to promote him to the rank of Subordinate Judge with consequential benefits.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the Petitioner was appointed as a temporary Munsif and was posted as Additional Munsif in the Judgeship of Balasore vide notification dated 12.9.1975, Thereafter he was appointed substantively in the rank of Munsif with effect from 2.8.1980 vide notification dated 26th of July, 1985. Other Munsifs junior to him were given promotion as Subordinate Judge in the years 1987 and 1988 but he was not promoted. He moved a representation on 5.4.1989 but the same was rejected by the High Court. However, subsequently in the year 1991 he was given promotion to Orissa Judicial Service Class-I. He has prayed for his retrospective promotion with effect from the date his juniors were given promotion.
3. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of Opposite Party No. 2, it has been mentioned that the Standing Committee of the High Court considered the case of promotion of the Petitioner on 4.1.1989 but he was not found fit. It is also mentioned that his integrity and general reputation came under adverse comments in his C.C.R. for the period from 7.5.1987 to 31.12.1987 and from 22.6.1987 to 25.7.1988. However, in December, 1991, he was found suitable and was promoted to the rank of Orissa Judicial Service Class-I.
4. Considering the above mentioned facts and circumstances, it cannot be said that the Petitioner was having spotless service record. A Judicial Officer has to maintain integrity throughout and to follow judicial discipline. But the adverse entries in his C.C.R. and consideration of his promotion by the Standing Committee of the High Court shows that due to adverse entries in his C.C. Rs. he was not found fit for promotion. However, later on when he was found fit for promotion he was duly given promotion to Orissa Judicial Service Class-I.
5. Law is well settled that promotion cannot be claimed as a matter of right. An employee has only a right to be considered for promotion. It appears that the case of the Petitioner for promotion was considered by the Standing Committee of the High Court on 7.9.1988 and 5.10.1988. On both the occasions, he was found unsuitable for promotion. It may be stated that a new cadre, i.e., Orissa Judicial Service Class-I (Junior) was created and the case of promotion of the Petitioner to the said cadre was also considered by the Standing Committee of the High Court on 4.1.1989 but he was found unfit. Therefore, it appears that on repeated occasions, his case for promotion was considered but he was not found suitable for promotion.
6. In the above mentioned facts and circumstances, no case for interference by this Court has been made out. Therefore, the Writ Petition is misconceived and, as such, the same is dismissed.
7. No order as to costs.
N.Prusty, J.
I agree.