Judgment :- Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. The petitioners, two in number, have filed this writ petition for issuance of Certiorarified Mandamus for quashing the proceedings in R.C. No: 18890/G1/96 dated 17.9.1997 of respondents 2 to 4 and to give a further direction to the first respondent to promote the petitioners to the post of Deputy Chief Engineer with all consequential benefits. 3. The petitioners, who are diploma holders, were appointed as Assistant Engineers under the Commissioner of Sugars. It is the case of the petitioners that though they are seniors to respondents 2, 3 and 4, the respondents 2 to 4 were given promotion to the post of Deputy Chief Engineers ignoring the claim of the present petitioners. According to the counsel for the petitioners, petitioners had the required qualification and experience of 11 years as contemplated and yet they were illegally ignored in the matter relating to promotion. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 to 4 contend that unless the person obtains a certificate in BOE (Boiler Operation Engineer) examination, such person is not eligible for promotion. 5. Though the learned counsel for the petitioners tried to controvert this position by submitting that there was an exemption, on going through the relevant records, I find that extension for three years for acquiring the certificate was granted and the same has expired, but there was no exemption to the effect that a person without such certificate would be eligible for promotion. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner also pointed out that, three or four other persons have been promoted even though they do not have such a certificate. Even assuming that irregular promotion has been given to the other officers, that will not give right to the petitioners to stake a claim that they should have been promoted. One illegality cannot give rise to another illegality. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that out of two petitioners, the first petitioner has, after the filing of this writ petition, obtained the certificate in the year 1999 and therefore, while considering the question of promotion, which was given to some other persons, in 2001, the first petitioner has been illegally ignored. In fact in the connected contempt petition, such an assertion has been made. The fact that one Mr. In fact in the connected contempt petition, such an assertion has been made. The fact that one Mr. Velumani, a junior person was promoted to the rank of Deputy Engineer in 2001 is not disputed. Having regard to these aspects, I deem it proper in the interest of justice to give a direction to the respondents that the petitioner shall be deemed to have been promoted with effect from the date on which Mr. Velumani was promoted in the year 2001 and on that basis the financial benefits and the arrears will be calculated and the amount so calculated should be paid to the first petitioner within a period of four months from the date of communication of the order. It also goes without saying that for the purpose of pension and other retirement benefits it shall be deemed that the petitioner has been promoted with effect from the date on which Velumani has been promoted. 8. So far as the second petitioner is concerned, it is not disputed that he has not acquired such certificate and he has resigned in the mean time. In such view of the matter, no relief can be granted so far as the second petitioner is concerned and his prayer is rejected. 9. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.