JUDGMENT A. S. NAIDU, J. — The petitioner was initially appointed as a Junior Accountant on 2.8.85 and was promoted to the post of Senior Accountant on 14.10.88 in the establishment of the Orissa Khadi and Village Industries Board (in short “the Board”). Admittedly the petitioner is a lady belonging to Scheduled Tribe Community. She has approached the portals of this Court being aggrieved by the action of the Board which is not considering her case for promotion to the post of Accounts Supervisor. It is alleged that on 22.4.92 ignoring the claim of the petitioner, opp. parties promoted opp. party No. 6 to the post of Accounts Supervisor, for which the petitioner is constrained to file the present writ application. 2. It is specifically submitted by the petitioner that she being a Scheduled Tribe woman, in consonance with the Orissa Reservation of Vacancies in Posts and Services (for S.C. and S.T.) Act, 1975 and the Orissa Reservation of Vacancies in Posts and Services (for S.C. and S.T.) Rules, 1976, as amended in 1984, she should have been considered for the post and appointed as Accounts Supervisor. It is further averred that the post being one for reserved category, the Board authorities acted illegally in appointing opp. party No. 6 who belongs to general category without dereserving the post. 3. The case of the Board is that the petitioner is not eligible to hold the post and so it was dereserved and opp. party No. 6 was appointed. It is further stated that promotion of opp. party No. 6 was on ad hoc basis and the petitioner should have no grievance. 4. In view of the inter se controversy, the stand taken by the Board that the petitioner was not eligible on merit, needs to be decided first. According to the Board, the petitioner has no right to be promoted. Relying upon Regulation No. 18 of the Board’s regula¬tion, 1960, the opp. 4. In view of the inter se controversy, the stand taken by the Board that the petitioner was not eligible on merit, needs to be decided first. According to the Board, the petitioner has no right to be promoted. Relying upon Regulation No. 18 of the Board’s regula¬tion, 1960, the opp. parties submit that promotion to the higher grades/ranks are to be made on the basis of merit and ability and that none shall be promoted who is not on the basis of his record and in the opinion of the appointing authority, fit for promotion and of those who are fit, only the fittest shall be promoted to any particular vacancy, the factor of seniority being taken into account only when all other factors and particularly the factor o merit are equal. It is stated that Accounts Supervisors are the Head Ministe¬rial Officer of the Accounts Section and the said post is equiva¬lent to the post of Section Officer of the General Branch and Audit Superintendent of Audit Branch, the scale of pay of the Accounts Supervisor being identical to the scale of pay of the Section Officers. Placing reliance on the Government Resolution dated 1.1.1985 (Annexure-A) and Memo No. 14030 dated 3.5.1988 (Annexure-B), it is contended that the Board has accepted the guidelines pre¬scribed by the Government and according to the said resolution, an employee is eligible to be promoted to the post of Accounts Supervisor if he/she has rendered a minimum of 12 years of con¬tinuous service inclusive of 9 years service as Senior Account¬ant. The petitioner admittedly having been appointed on 2.8.1985 as a Junior Accountant and having been promoted to the post of Senior Accountant on 14.10.1988, did not satisfy the eligibility criteria and does not possess minimum qualification of being promoted to the post of Accounts Supervisor. The applicability of Government Resolution dated 1.1.1985 to the employees working order the Board came up for consideration before this Court in OJC No. 318 of 1990 (Golok Bihari Sethi v. Orissa Khadi & Village Industries Board and others) and this Court, categorically came to a finding that the said resolution, a copy of which is Annexure-A to the counter is not applicable to the Board. The same place is no more available to the Board. It is further contended by the opp. parties that the Board follows the Government Circulars regarding promotion and other matters. The same place is no more available to the Board. It is further contended by the opp. parties that the Board follows the Government Circulars regarding promotion and other matters. The mere fact that the Board has been following the Government Circulars, even if that be so, would not lend legal colour to the action of the Board. If non-applicability of a particular circular is canvassed before this Court, the Board, which has followed that Circular, has to satisfy that it was legally enjoined to do what it had done and if the Circular issued by the Government has ipso facto application to the Board. Similar contention was also raised by the Board in the case referred to supra and has been negatived. 5. Admittedly the petitioner who belongs to Scheduled Tribe Community. has a right for being considered for promotion to the post of Accounts Supervisors. Illegally denying promotion to an employee who is otherwise entitled for consideration also at¬tracts the protection under Article 16 of the Constitution. It is incumbent upon the employer, who is denying promotion to an employee who has a right to be considered, to establish that the constitutional right is not violated. In the present case, the only ground for which the case of the petitioner was not taken for consideration, is that she did not possess the requisite years of experience as mentioned in Annexure-A. In view of the clear finding of this Court in the earlier writ application referred to supra that the conditions of the Circular issued by the Government is not applicable to the employees working under the Board, I have no hesitation to hold that the case of the petitioner was wrongly not considered by the Board. 6. In view of the discussions made above, I direct opp. party No. 1, the Board to adjudge the suitability of the peti¬tioner for the post of Accounts Supervisor by treating her to be eligible for the post and thereafter, take appropriate decision keeping in view the report of the Promotion Committee. This direction is issued keeping in view the provisions of Regulation 18 of the Board’s Regulation. It is needles to say that the Promotion Committee constituted for the purpose shall judge the merit and suitability of the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of communication of this order. This direction is issued keeping in view the provisions of Regulation 18 of the Board’s Regulation. It is needles to say that the Promotion Committee constituted for the purpose shall judge the merit and suitability of the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of communication of this order. If the post is of reserved category, then the petitioner’s merit alone can only be considered she being the only employee belonging to S.T. Category and if she would be found suitable, her promotion shall relate back to the date when opp. party No. 6 was promoted on ad hoc basis. 7. In view of the fact that the petitioner’s case was not legally taken into consideration in spite of the judgment passed in other similar cases and great prejudice has been caused to her, I allow this writ application with the cost of Rs. 500/- (Five hundred). Petition allowed with costs.