Judgment Radha Mohan Prasad, J. 1. In this writ application prayer has been made for issuances of a direction to the District and Sessions Judge, Patna (respondent no, 2) to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion on the post of Seristadar in the judgeship with effect from 1-6-1992 since when the post fell vacant. 2. After filing of the writ application on 19th July, 1993 an office order , was issued by the then District and Sessions Judge, Patna on 31st July, 1993 promoting Md. Nuruddin, who is respondent No.4 to the post of Seristadar of the court with effect from the date he joined the post. The validity of this order has been challenged by the petitioner by filing petition on 5-8-1993. 3. It has been contended by Mr. Tejbahadur Singh, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner that undisputedly the petitioner is senior to respondent No.4 in the Super Time Selection Grade. In support of this the learned Counsel has placed reliance on Annexure 1 which is a nothing but by the Registrar of the judgeship which has also been acted upon by the district and Sessions Judge, who appointed Anand Bahadur Singh, who was as No.1 in the list as Seristradar, containing the names of Super Time selection Grade clerks according to their seniority as Seristradar It is stated by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the said Anand Bahadur Singh superannuated on 31st May, 1992, whereafter, the appointment of respondent no.4 was made, vide Annexure 8 to the petition for amendment filed on behalf of the petitioner, arbitrarily ignoring the claim of the petitioner. 4. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the District and sessions Judge and the Registrar, Civil Court. Patna (respondent Nos.2 and 3 respectively) Mr Mitra, learned counsel appearing for the said respondents contended that according to the Bihar Civil Courts staff (Clause III and Class iv) Rules, framed by this Court on 3-10-1992 promotion to the post of the seristadars of District Judge cannot be made unless the concerned persons have passed the proficiency test in Court Fee Act, Stamp Act, and Suit valuation Act, etc. He however, has not disputed the fact that the petitioner is senior to respondent No.4. He however, has not disputed the fact that the petitioner is senior to respondent No.4. In support of his submission, the learned counsel has placed reliance on Rules 59 and 63 of the aforesaid Rules, which are as follows : - "59. Promotion : Appointment to the higher grade of the ministerial establishment should ordinarily be made by seniority from lower grade provided they possess the prescribed educational and other qualifications as laid down in these Rules or any other existing law that may be applicable and are otherwise fit to perform the duties attached thereto and pass the tests, if any prescribed under these Rules. " "63. A clerk before his Promotion to Super time scale shall have to pass an examination on procedure (Civil and Criminal; Stamp act, Court Fee Act, Suit Valuation Act, correspondence and noting and drafting. Junior Selection Grade Typist Stenographers may be transferred to the posts of Clerks if they pass the necessary examinations as mentioned hereinbefore. " 5. Mr. Mitra, learned Counsel for the respondents has submitted that as the petitioner has not passed the proficiency test of Court Fee Act, Stamp act, Suit Valuation Act etc. , he was not entitled for consideration of his case for promotion to the post of Seristadar. 6. In my opinion, the submission of Mr. Mitra is unfounded and wholly misconceived. There is nothing in the aforementioned Rules to indicats that an employee who is already in the Super Time Scale is not entitled to be considered for promotion as Seristadar unless he has passed the aforesaid proficiency test. This Rules came into force on 3rd October, 1992. From Annexure 1 it appears that the petitioner had already been promoted in the Super, time Selection Grade much prior to the said Rules coming into force. The noting of the Registrar contained in Annexure 1 is of 4th March, 1992, according to which, the names mentioned therein only contains the names of Super time selection grade clerks according to thir seniority. The petitioner is placed at SI. No.2 of the said list, whereas respondent No.1 has been placed at SI. No.3. 7. Accordingly, I am of the view that the petitioner, who was senior to respondent No.4 has been arbitrarily deprived of his promotion to the post of Seristadar. The petitioner is placed at SI. No.2 of the said list, whereas respondent No.1 has been placed at SI. No.3. 7. Accordingly, I am of the view that the petitioner, who was senior to respondent No.4 has been arbitrarily deprived of his promotion to the post of Seristadar. However, it has been brought to my notice that during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner has superannuated on 31st january, 1994. Accordingly, I dispose of this writ application with the direction to the District and Sessions Judge Patna (respondent No.2) to forthwith issue necessary orders of promotion of the petitioner to the post of Seristadar with effect from the date when respondent No.4 was given promotion and consequently to give all benefits including pay arising therefrom. The Writ application is accordingly allowed, but without costs. Writ Application Allowed.