Judgment :- AR. Lakshmanan, J. This writ appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned single judge in O.P. No. 14342 of 1998 dated 12.10.1998 dismissing the Original Petition on the ground that the appellant/ petitioner had not satisfied the test for considering his name for three grade promotions during the period of 25 years. It is not in dispute that the appellant was denied the 3rd grade promotion in terms of Ext. P1. His representations under Exts. P4 and P4(a) were also rejected under Ext. P6. In the above circumstances, the appellant approached this Court. Strong reliance was placed on Art. VIII of the Pay Revision, 1990 relating to Grade Promotion (Ext. P1). Clause v of Ext. P1 reads as follows: "v. If any workman recruited under the Board's service does not get atleast three promotions/ grade promotions within a period of25 years from the date of his first entry into the Board's Service, then he will be granted appropriate number of grade promotions on completion of a period of 25 years from the date of his first entry into the Board's service." In this case, the petitioner/ appellant was away in foreign countries for eight years from 1982 to 1990 on leave without allowances. Therefore, the petitioner has served the Electricity Board only for a period of twenty years. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the period of eight years spent on leave without allowances for employment abroad should also be tagged on to the service rendered by the appellant in the Electricity Board to give him the three grade promotions in the Board. The Electricity Board declined his request on the ground that the period of eight years during which the appellant had served elsewhere under a different employer cannot at all be taken into account and, therefore, the appellant will have only 19 years and six months of service in the Electricity Board and hence he is not eligible to get the 3rd grade promotion. 2. In this case, the appellant entered the Board's service on 28.8.1964 and his service was regularised in the Board with effect from 9.2.1965. He proceeded on leave without allowance for employment abroad on 7.4.1980 and reported back to duty after cancelling the un availed portion of the leave granted to him on 27.10.1998, ie., after eight years six months and twenty days. 3. He proceeded on leave without allowance for employment abroad on 7.4.1980 and reported back to duty after cancelling the un availed portion of the leave granted to him on 27.10.1998, ie., after eight years six months and twenty days. 3. Learned counsel for the Electricity Board invited our attention to Appendix XII-A to the Kerala Service Rules, which has been made applicable 'to the service of the Electricity Board as well. R.4 thereof provides that during the currency of the period of leave, the officers shall lose all service benefits such as earning of leave including half pay leave, pension, gratuity, increments, etc. and also promotion chances as may arise with reference to their seniority in the posts from which they proceeded on leave and that they shall also lose seniority in the higher grade/ grades with reference to their juniors who might get promoted to such grade/grades before they rejoin duty. Based on the above rule, learned counsel for the Electricity Board submitted that the Appellant is not entitled to take into account the period spent by him on employment abroad under a different employer for the purpose of the 3rd higher grade promotion. It is further submitted that the appellant has granted grade promotion (higher grade) with effect from 1.1.1979 and he was granted further promotion as Senior Mobile Crane Operators with effect from 31.10.1990 vide order dated 5.3.1991. Thus, it is submitted, the appellant has been granted one grade promotion and a further promotion within a period of 18 years of his service, as per Art. VIII Clause IV of the Long Term Settlement of 1990. According to the learned counsel for the Electricity Board, clause V of the Long Term Settlement is not applicable to the appellant since he has not put in 25 years of service in the Board to be eligible for the 3rd grade promotion. It is the case of the Board that no promotion which is due to the appellant has been denied to him and that no juniors have been promoted in preference to the appellant after he joined duty, contrary to the provisions of the Kerala Service Rules. 4. Strong reliance was placed by counsel for the appellant on Ext. P2(a) order. That order, in our opinion, has no relevance to the case of the appellant. 4. Strong reliance was placed by counsel for the appellant on Ext. P2(a) order. That order, in our opinion, has no relevance to the case of the appellant. The appellant has not completed 25 years of service under the Electricity Board and hence he has no right, as in the case of Sri. M.R. Sankarankutty, in whose favour Ext. P2(a) order has been issued, to get a 3rd grade promotion. Hence, the contention in this regard must fail. In view of the above, we are of the opinion that all the contentions raised in the Original Petition by the appellant does not deserve any consideration. The appellant, in our opinion, is not eligible for a 3rd grade promotion. Therefore, we have no hesitation in dismissing the writ appeal confirming the judgment of the learned single judge. The Writ Appeal is accordingly dismissed.