ORDER 1. In this writ petition the petitioner has sought for a mandamus directing the respondent Corporation to promote him to Class III in the services of the Corporation. 2. The petitioner was appointed as a Peon in 1978 and is presently working as Storekeeper in officiating capacity. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that under similar circumstances, this Court in C.W.J.C.No.3724 of 1991 issued direction in the case of similarly situate employees in relation to different Corporations pursuant to which the order contained in Annexure 4 was issued giving promotion to those employees, but despite the petitioner's approaching the authority in the Corporation repeatedly with his aforesaid claim, he has been kept denied of his due promotion. 4. However, it is not claimed that the case of any person junior to him (petitioner) has been considered superseding him. 5. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Corporation in which it is stated that on 25th July, (sic) the State Government has come out with a notification that no appointment or promotion is to be made in the Corporation under the Industries Department. A photo copy of the said letter of the Government has been annexed as Annexure H. 6. Learned counsel for the Corporation has submitted that the petitioner has been granted time bound promotion but in so far as his claim relating to regular promotion is concerned, it cannot be considered in view of the ban imposed by the State Government as there is financial crunch prevailing in the Corporation. Further, it is submitted by him that whenever the work has been taken from the petitioner on a higher post, he has been paid an additional pay as per rule 103 of the Bihar Service Code. According to the learned counsel for the Corporation, in view of the ban imposed by the State Government under which the Corporation is functioning, the petitioner cannot be granted any regular promotion. 7. I find substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the Corporation. It is by now well settled that no person can claim promotion as a matter of right. At most one can claim for consideration of his case for promotion in case an employer decides to consider the cases of others for promotion. 7. I find substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the Corporation. It is by now well settled that no person can claim promotion as a matter of right. At most one can claim for consideration of his case for promotion in case an employer decides to consider the cases of others for promotion. However, in the present case, in view of the financial crunch, the State Government issued direction contained in Annexure-H putting ban on making any promotion or appointment in the Corporation. 8. Under such circumstances, this Court sitting in writ jurisdiction cannot issue mandamus to the respondents, as prayed on behalf of the petitioner. The writ petition is, thus, dismissed.