Judgment S.N.Jha, J. 1. This writ petition on behalf of the sole petitioner has been filed seeking direction upon the respondents to treat 9th September 1980 as the date of his regular promotion on the post of Assistant Executive Engineer and, accordingly, determine his seniority. 2. The case of the petitioner so far as relevant to the dispute, shortly stated, is that after completing the Kalawadhi of eight years in 1977 he was due for promotion on the post of Assistant Executive Engineer. In 1980 the post of Assistant Executive Engineer fell vacant at Jakkanpur Grid Maintenance Sub Division after transfer of the incumbent. The charge of the post however was given to one Ambika Prasad who was much junior to him. The petitioner made representation to the General Manager on 18.7.1980. On 6.9.1980 he was appointed as Assistant Executive Engineer on officiating basis at the Grid Maintenance Sub Division, Jakkanpur till posting of a substitute. He continued as such for three years. On 27.5.1983 he was granted regular promotion from the date of assumption of the charge. Since he was already holding the post of Assistant Executive Engineer, the effective date of promotion was treated as 27.5.1983. He wants this date to be shifted to 9.9.1980. 3. The case of the respondent Bihar State Electricity Board is that the desired relief regarding shifting of the date of promotion from 27.5.1983 to 9.9.1980 involves question of seniority because in that case the seniority on the post of Assistant Executive Engineer will be liable to revision which cannot be done after lapse of 17 years. On facts, it has been stated that the petitioner was given charge of the post of Assistant Executive Engineer at the Grid Maintenance Sub Division, Jakkanpur in addition to his own duties on the post of Junior Electrical Engineer as a local arrangement by the General Manager-cum- Chief Engineer. He however cannot claim any right on the basis of this posting for the reason that he was not seniormost Junior Electrical Engineer in the cadre and he was given charge of the post of Assistant Executive Engineer in fortuituous circumstances after vacancy occurred on account of transfer of the incumbent. The list of 34 Junior Electrical Engineer said to be senior to the petitioner has been enclosed as part of para 6 of the counter affidavit. The list of 34 Junior Electrical Engineer said to be senior to the petitioner has been enclosed as part of para 6 of the counter affidavit. It has further been stated that the promotion on the post of Assistant Executive Engineer can be given only by the Apex Board and the General Manager- cum-Chief Engineer, Transmission, under whose order the petitioner was given additional charge of the post was not competent to grant such promotion. The Departmental Promotion Committee considered the cases of different Junior Electrical Engineers including the petitioner in its meeting dated 1.7.82 and its recommendation orders of promotion were issued with respect to several Junior Electrical Engineers, vide Annexures A and B. Further stand of the Board is that the claim of the petitioner is barred by constructive res judicata inasmuch as he had approached this Court in CWJC No. 2114 of 1995 seeking direction for payment of additional pay for the period between 9.9.1980 and 26.5.1983, but he did not make any claim for seniority, reckoning the said period, on the post of Assistant Executive Engineer. Lastly, stand of the Board is that the promotion on the post of Assistant Executive Engineer was given in the light of the direction of the Supreme Court in the case of Surya Narayan Yadav & Ors. vs. Bihar State Electricity Board & Ors. AIR 1985 SC 941 , to the effect "in regard to seniority the appellants have to rank below permanent and temporary recruits to regular posts of engineers held under the Board prior to 1983 and they shall be assigned seniority above such recruits pendente lite". 4. After hearing counsel for the parties, I find substance in the case of the Board. Besides the question of delay and laches even assuming that the claim of the petitioner was not barred by the principles of res judicata in view of CWJC No. 2114 of 1995, the fact is unassailable that as many as 34 Junior Electrical Engineers were available at the relevant time but bypassing their claims the petitioner was given additional charge of the post at the Grid Maintenance Sub Division, Jakkanpur apparently because he was already posted there as Junior Electrical Engineer. This being a local arrangement, made in fortuituous circumstances, I have no doubt in mind that he cannot be allowed any advantage or right on the ground that he performed the duties on the post of Assistant Executive Engineer between 9.9.1980 and 26.5.1983. Besides, the promotions were given in the light of the direction of the Supreme Court and the petitioner therefore has no case. 5. In the result, I do not find any merit in this writ petition which is accordingly dismissed. No costs.