JUDGMENT S.H.A. Raza, J. - The petitioner on 24-6-1964 who was appointed as Upper Division Assistant in U. P. Civil Secretariat Ministerial Service and on 23-12-1980 promoted to the post of Section Officer only on ad-hoc basis, invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by filing the aforesaid to writ petitions. In Writ Petition No. 96 of 1980 the petitioner prayed for the grant of following reliefs : I. A writ, order or direction, directing the opposite party No. 1 and 2 to bring up the record of the selection, held in the year 1980, for promotion to the post of Section Officer and to declare the result of the petitioner containing the result, without adverse remarks, pertaining to the year 1973-74 and i976-77 which have been quashed by the Public Services Tribunal tide its judgment and order dated 6-7-1989 passed in the Claim Petition No. 147/V/83 ; II. A writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus to confirm the petitioner against permanent vacancy of Section Officer which has been kept in reserve against SI. No. 154 in the order dated 3-11-1980 as contained in Annexme-3A to the C. A. dated 11-9-1981 with effect from the date his junior Sri T. B. Khare was made permanent on the post of Section Officer after computing of services rendered on ad-hoc basis as Section Officer towards probation. III. A writ, order or direction commanding the opposite party No. 1 to sanction all consequential financial and all other benefits including sanction of selection grade with effect from the date his junior Sri T. B. Khare was sanctioned selection grade as Section Officer. IV. A writ, order or direction commanding the opposite party No. 1 to promote the petitioner to the post of Under Secretary with effect from the date i. e. on 5-4-1934 his junior Sri T. B. Khare was promoted to the post of Under Secretary. IV. A writ, order or direction commanding the opposite party No. 1 to promote the petitioner to the post of Under Secretary with effect from the date i. e. on 5-4-1934 his junior Sri T. B. Khare was promoted to the post of Under Secretary. V. A writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus against the opposite party No. 1 to direct the Secretary, Medical and Health Department to pay the petitioner all the outstanding salary, allowances as well as the revised pay and allowances including events subsequent to the upgrading and revision of pay scale of Section Officer w. e. f. 1-12-1985 and 1-1-1986 respectively together with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of payment with held till the date of actual payment thereof to him. In Writ Petition No. 3093 of 1979 the petitioner prayed for the grant of the following reliefs : I. A writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the annexures-XV and XVJ and XVUI after summoning its original from, the opposite parties No. 1 and 2 ; II. That by a writ in the nature of mandamus the opposite party No. 1 be commanded to make a regular appointment in accordance with the law on the post of Section Officer. III. That by an appropriate writ, order or direction the opposite party be further commanded to promote the petitioner on the post of Section Officer. IV. That by an appropriate writ, order or direction the opposite party No. 1 be also commanded to treat the petitioner to be promoted as Section Officer on ad-hoc basis as on the date i. e. June, 1979 on which his immediate junior Sn Tej Bahadur Khare, opposite party No. 8 was promoted as Section Officer on ad-hoc basis. IV. That by an appropriate writ, order or direction the opposite party No. 1 be also commanded to treat the petitioner to be promoted as Section Officer on ad-hoc basis as on the date i. e. June, 1979 on which his immediate junior Sn Tej Bahadur Khare, opposite party No. 8 was promoted as Section Officer on ad-hoc basis. V. That by an appropriate writ, order of direction the opposite party No. 1 be further commanded to sanction all consequential financial and other benefits including the striking down the adverse part of the aforesaid entries for 19'3-74 and 1976-77 and computing of services rendered on ad-hoc basis as Section Officer towards probation for confirmation on the post of Section Officer on the date on which his immediate junior Sri Tej Bahadur Khare opposite party No. 8 was confirmed as Section Officer, as if the petitioner has not been superseded in the matter of promotion as Section Officer on ad-hoc basis in the Selection held in the month of May, 1979. 2. The annexure sought to be quashed relate to the appointment of his juniors to the pest of Section Officer. 3. As in both the writ petitions the reliefs claimed are more or less identical and the same where heard together they are disposed by a common judgment. 4. The admitted facts of the case which are also evident from the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the opposite parties 1 to 5 in Writ Petition No 96 of 1980 are that regular selection held by the Public Service Commission in December, 1979, was finalised in 1980 which related to the vacancies of Section Officer pertaining to recruitment years 1974 to 1981. It was also averred that pending regular selection for the vacancies of Section Officers that occurred after June, 1974 ad-hoc appointments had been made from time to time by the Chief Secretary to Government of Uttar Pradesh on the basis of seniority subject to rejection of unfit from amongst the permanent Upper Division Assistants of the Secretariat having to their credit ten years' permanent service as Upper Division Assistant in accordance with the Government orders dated 30-11-1971. 5. 5. In ad-hoc selections held in May, 1979, September/October, 1979 and March, 1980, respectively the petitioner was found unsuitable for the post of Section Officer In December, 1980 the case of the petitioner was again considered by the Chief Secretary to Government of Uttar Pradesh and that time he was approved for promotion to the post of Sec ion Officer on ad-hoc basis. Accordingly he was promoted to the post of Section Officer on ad-hoc basis by means of a notification dated December 23, 1980. 6. The reasons for not promoting the petitioner as Section Officer on ad-hoc basis had been indicated in paras 11 and 18 of the counter affidavit. It is alleged in para 18 of the counter affidavit that in the year 1974 the then Director of Tourism was directed by the State Government to communicate to the petitioner the adverse entry recorded in the character roll of the petitioner in the year 1973-74 which was subsequently got approved by the then Minister of Tourism and Sports and the adverse entry was duly communicated to the petitioner vide letter dated 5-9-1974 issued by the Director of Tourism. The representation dated 10-1-198J preferred by the petitioner against the said adverse entry was rejected on 16-6-1980. In para 18 of the counter affidavit it was averred that the adverse entries recorded in the character roll of the petitioner for the years 1973-74, 1975-76, and 1976-77 had already been communicated to the petitioner and the notices to the above effect were appended under the above entries by the department concerned. 7. On January 14, 1980, & Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 96 of 1980 directed the State of U. P. and the U P. Public Services Tribunal to record their opinion with regard to the suitability of the petitioner for the post of Section Officer firstly by taking into account adverse remarks awarded to the petitioner for the years 1973-74 and 1976-77 and secondly, by not taking into the said adverse entries. The opposite parties shall maintain the record of the opinion. It was further directed that the result of the selection shall be subject to the decision of the writ petition, 8. The regular selection was completed on August 21 and 22,1980. The petitioner amongst others was also interviewed by the Selection Committee on 21-8-1980. The opposite parties shall maintain the record of the opinion. It was further directed that the result of the selection shall be subject to the decision of the writ petition, 8. The regular selection was completed on August 21 and 22,1980. The petitioner amongst others was also interviewed by the Selection Committee on 21-8-1980. The Selection Committee acted in accordance with the aforesaid directions of this Court and the result of the regular selection in respect of the petitioner had been reserved and kept in a sealed cover by the U. P. Public Service Commission and a vacancy in the Section Officer's cadre had been left unfilled for the petitioner. In para 21 of the counter affidavit it was further stated that the eligibility list were prepared for year wise vacancy strictly under the provisions of Rule 21 of the U. P. Promotion by Selection In Consultation with Public Service Commission (Procedure) Rules, 1?70. The petitioner's name was included in the eligibility list for the vacancies pertaining to recruitment year 1978-79 and the three candidates Sarva Sri Surya Prasad Cha irasia Ram Shiromani Singh and Tej Bahadur Khare, who were junior to the petitioner, were also include in the eligibility list of the recruitment year 1978-79 The regular selection for the vacancies occurred during recruitment years 1979-80 and 1980-81 was also made alongwith the selection for the vacancies of the five preceding recruitment years vis-a-vis 1974 75, 1975-76, 1976 77, 1977-78 and 1978-79 and sixty three candidates junior to the petitioner were also called for interview in the regular selection under reference It was stated in the counter affidavit that all facts were correctly placed before the Selection Committee and the selection was held in accordance with the rules. The representation dated 28-4-1979 was rejected and the result was communicated to the petitioner. 9. The petitioner in his writ petition has contended that the adverse remarks were ante-dated and manufactured by certain officials to may his promotion to the post of Section Officer and regular selection for the said post. It was further contended that the aforesaid entries were never communicated to him and for the first time he came to know of the aforesaid adverse entries when a counter affidavit was filed in his writ petition and thereafter he preferred representations for expunging the aforesaid adverse entries before the State Government. It was further contended that the aforesaid entries were never communicated to him and for the first time he came to know of the aforesaid adverse entries when a counter affidavit was filed in his writ petition and thereafter he preferred representations for expunging the aforesaid adverse entries before the State Government. The petitioner contended that on 1-8-1978 he was allowed to cross the efficiency bar and selection grade was also allowed to him with effect from 13-8-1976. It there existed any adverse entries which were never communicated to him it had lost its value. It was further contended that against the adverse remarks awarded to him for the years 1973-74 and 1976-77, the petitioner preferred a claim petition before the U. P. Public Services Tribunal (V), Lucknow. On 6-7-1989 the petition was allowed and the adverse entries for the years 1973-74 and 1976-77 were expunged' The petitioner has annexed a certified copy of the said order alongwith an application bearing No 16173 (W) of 1989 dated November, 2,1989 which was supported by an affidavit. The aforesaid entries were quashed by the Tribunal for the following reasons : (a) entries were never communicated ; (b) likelihood of its (adverse entries) having been awarded due to prejudice of opposite parties ; (c) entries were inconsistent, vague and colourless ; (d) entries may have been awarded as a result of some prejudice working in the mind of concerned authority ; (e) entries for the year 1976-77 were awarded by Sri Khanjan Lal, Special Secretary who had not seen the work of the petitioner for a period of three months and hence the said entry was bad in view of several Government orders. 10. There is nothing on record to indicate as to whether against the said order of U. P. Public Services Tribunal any writ petition was filed in which the order of the Tribunal was stayed. 11 Thus it is evident from the facts narrated above that due to the aforesaid entries which were never communicated to the petitioner and were later on quashed by the order of the U. P. f Public Services Tribunal, the petitioner was superseded by his juniors when ad-hoc promotions and later on regular selections were made on the post of Section Officers. 12. 12. In the case of U.P. State Electricity Board and another v. Kharag Singh and another, reported in 1990 Supreme Court Cases (L and S), 597 their lordships of the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed : "The facts are in a very short compass. Respondent 1 viz. Kharag Singh was appointed on May 15,1966 as Junior Engineer (ordinary grade) and thereafter, be was confirmed in the same post. On April 4,1977, the Chief Engineer promoted 69 Junior Engineers, of them 27 persons were junior to him. w.e.f April 1, 1976 in the selection grade. But the petitioner was not promoted due to adverse entries recorded in his service book. On September 7, 1977, 88 Junior Engineers were further promoted by the Chief Engineer in selection grade, by passing respondent 1 deferring his case. On February 14, 1978, 37 engineers including 8 engineers junior to respondent 1 were promoted to the post of Assistant Engineers but respondent 1 was not considered. Five Engineers belonging to Scheduled Caste and junior to respondent were also promoted to the pest of Assistant Engineer. Respondent 1 who belongs to the Scheduled Caste was not promoted in spite of the fact that he was senior and suitable. The said respondent 1, therefore, made an application before the U. P. Public Services Tribunal, assailing the refusal to consider his case for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer in the selection grade as well as for further promotion to Assistant Engineer, contending, inter alia, that all the adverse reports for the period May 23, 1972 to July 23, 1973 in the year 1972-73 and from July 24, 1973 to November 3o, 1973 against which he filed representations were expunged by an order dated May 5, 1979 passed by the Chief Engineer. He has also pleaded that besides these adverse entries no other adverse entries no other adverse reports were communicated to him and, as such, his case was entitled to be considered by the authorities concerned and he should have been given the promotions due to him, as has been given to other engineer though some of them are juniors to him. The Tribunal on hearing the parties passed its judgment on Ootober 17, 1984 in Claim Petition No. 208 (P)/4/79, holding, inter alia that : Though the case of respondent 1 was considered but it was left out every time of selection from 1977 to 1979 and the only reason for not giving promotion to respondent 1 was that his work was not satisfactory and may adverse entries were found in his character roll. It has been further found that besides the adverse reports for the year 1972-73 which were expunged by the order of the Chief Engineer dated May 5, 1979, there was no other adverse report. The Tribunal, therefore, after considering entire facts and circumstances of the case passed the following order : "This claim petition is allowed and respondent are directed that they should promote the petition in the selection grade from the date on which juniors to him were promoted and the petitioner should be further promoted He should be paid all the other benefits and arrears of salary and seniority accordingly. These directions should be complied with within two months." ... .... .... .... ... "After considering the facts and circumstances of the case very carefully and also considering the findings arrived at by the Tribunal, more particularly the finding that there was no adverse report after November 30, 1973, which was also expunged by the Chief Engineer we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Tribunal. On the other hand, the order of the Tribunal, in our considered opinion, is unexceptional. All the adverse remarks, on the basis of which the case of respondent 1 herein for promotion in the selection grade and further promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer was left over, have been expunged some time in the year 1979 i.e. May 5,1979 by the Chief Engineer. The said respondent 1, therefore, is entitled to be considered from the date when bis case was first considered by the Selection Committee, As such the Tribunal has rightly come to the findings as regards the promotion to be given to respondent 1 in 1977 when his juniors were considered for promotion to the selection grade w.e./. April 1,1976 and, secondly when bis juniors were further promoted some time in February 14, 1978 to the posts of "Assistant Engineer." 13. April 1,1976 and, secondly when bis juniors were further promoted some time in February 14, 1978 to the posts of "Assistant Engineer." 13. Hon'ble Supreme Court refused to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal and confirming the order of the Tribunal dismissed the special leave petition. 14. In the case of Vijai Kumar I.A.S. v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1988 Supreme Court, 2060, speaking on behalf of the Bench, Hon'ble Mr. Justice K. Jagannatha Shetty ruled that it is a settled principle that an un-communicated adverse report should not form the foundation to deny benefits to a Government Servant when similar benefits are extended to his juniors. The State of Maharashtra was directed to give appellant senior time scale with effect from the date his juniors were given. 15. In the case of State of Gujarat v. S. Tripathy, reported in 1986 Labour Industrial Cases, 1658, speaking for the bench Hon'ble Mr. Justice O. Chinnappa Reddy indicated as under : "We, however, hasten to add that we do not thereby mean that Shri Tripathy was rightly passed over for promotion to the Selection Grade and to the super time scale. We agree with the High Court that Shri Tripathy was wrongly passed over. However, instead of directing the Government of Gujarat to consider afresh the claim of Shri Tripathy for promotion to the Selection Grade and the super time scale we declare that the respondent should have been given selection grade with effect from March 6,1981 (the date from which the High Court observed that he ought to have been given such promotion) and the super time scale with effect from November 1,1983 and direct the Government of Gujarat to give the consequential monetary benefits. Subject to these observations and directions, the appeals filed by the State of Gujarat are dismissed with costs which we quantify at Rs. 5000/- in each case." 16. There is no dearth of cases that in the matter of promotion a Government servant cannot be passed over by his juniors until and unless he is not found fit. In the instant case the petitioner was not found fit for promotion for the reason that there were certain adverse entries against him. The aforesaid adverse entries were never communicated to the petitioner which is evident from the judgment of the U. P. Public Services Tribunal. In the instant case the petitioner was not found fit for promotion for the reason that there were certain adverse entries against him. The aforesaid adverse entries were never communicated to the petitioner which is evident from the judgment of the U. P. Public Services Tribunal. The Tribunal also found that the aforesaid entries were no entries in the eye of law and the same w ere recorded in the service record of the petitioner on account of prejudice and malice. The aforesaid entries lost all relevance on 1-8-1978 when the petitioner was allowed to cross the efficiency bar and was given selection grade on 23-2-1979 with effect from 13-8-1976, But the opposite parties had been marring the chances of the promotion of the petitioner under an illusion that the petitioner was not fit for promotion on account of the aforesaid entries. There is no dispute that, the golden principles of equality enshrined in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India even in the matter of promotion are applicable. In the instant case the opposite parties have been promoting his juniors on ad-hoc basis retrospectively i. e. from the date of recruitment and promoting them substantively on the post of Section Officers but the discrimination was meted out to the petitioner and his chances of promotion were marred. Undoubtedly the promotions are made on the basis of seniority subject to rejection of unfit. It has been admitted that the petitioner was senior to Sarva Sri Surya Prasad Chaurasia, Ram Shiromani Singh and Tej Bahadur Khare who were firstly promoted to the post of Section Officers on ad-hoc basis and then promoted substantively on the said post. The petitioner cannot be deemed to be unfit only for the reason that some officers in prejudicial manner had passed some adverse remarks against him which were although kept on the file but were never communicated to the petitioner. It is not expected from the State, which is expected to act and function a3 a model employer, to treat public servant in such a discriminatory manner. 17. In view of what has been indicated herein above both the writ petitions succeed. It is not expected from the State, which is expected to act and function a3 a model employer, to treat public servant in such a discriminatory manner. 17. In view of what has been indicated herein above both the writ petitions succeed. A writ in the nature of mandamus is issued commanding the opposite parties to treat the petitioner to have been promoted as Section Officer on ad-hoc basis on the date, i. e. June, 1972, on which date his immediate junior Sri Tej Bahadur Khare was promoted as the Section Officer on ad-hoc basis and sanction him all consequential benefits including the sanction of the selection grade to the petitioner with effect from the date his junior Sri Tej Bahadur Khare was sanctioned selection grade as Section Officer. A writ in the nature of mandamus is further issued directing the opposite parties to declare the result of the selection held in the year 1980 for promotion to the post of Section Officer and consider the confirmation of the petitioner against permanent vacancy of Section Officer which has been kept in reserve against Serial No. 154 by means of order dated 3-11-1980 with effect from the date his junior Sri Tej Bahadur Khare was confirmed on the post of Section Officer and pass appropriate orders within one month ignoring the adverse remarks against the petitioner pertaining to the years 1973-74 and 1976-77 which have been quashed by the U. P Public Services Tribunal vide judgment and order dated 6-7-1989 passed in Claim Petition No. 147/V/83 with all consequential benefits and also to consider and pass appropriate orders during the aforesaid period pertaining to the promotion of the petitioner to the post of Under Secretary with effect from 5 4-1989 when his junior Sri Tej Bahadur Khare was promoted to the post of Under Secretary with all consequential benefits including out-standing salary with revised pay scale of Section Officers with effect from 1.-12-1985 and 1-1-1986 respectively. In the circumstances of the case there shall be no order as to costs.