Judgment :- A. Kulasekaran, J. 1.The Applicant, who lost his case before the 1st Respondent Tribunal, in OA.No.117/2007, is the Petitioner herein. 2.The Petitioner had filed the said OA, seeking for a direction to the 1st Respondent therein to consider his claim for promotion to HS Grade, from skilled category in the Respondents Establishment, based on the trade test already passed by him in the year 2002 and the result was belatedly declared on 211. 2004 and following the recommendation of the 2nd Respondent therein in letter No.405/957 EIR dated 12. 2007, in preference to others, to maintain the seniority and pay protection of the Petitioner in HS Grade. The said OA was disposed of, with a direction to the Respondents therein to conduct the trade test for HS-I, to enable him to qualify for the merged grade of HS. Hence, this Writ Petition has been filed by the applicant. 3.The case of the Petitioner is that he entered into service on 211. 1993, as Skilled Electrician in the Respondents Establishment at Arakkonam; that he had undergone trade test conducted in the year 2002 for promotion to HS Grade-II, however, the results were declared belatedly only on 211. 2004. In the mean time, both the HS-I and HS-II Grades were ordered to be merged together, with retrospective effect from 1. 1996; that in view of the facts that the Petitioner had undergone the test as early as in the year 2002, however, the results were belatedly declared on 211. 2004 and that both the HS-I and HS-II Grades were merged together, with retrospective effect from 1. 1996, he is entitled to the promotion to HS-I at least from the date of declaration of the results. 4.It is contended by the Respondents that the Grade Structure in the Industrial trades of the Defence Artisan Staff was modified, vide, Government of India Ministry of Defence Letter No.11(1)/2002/D(Civ.1) dated 20.5.2003 with retrospective effect from 1. 1996, he is entitled to the promotion to HS-I at least from the date of declaration of the results. 4.It is contended by the Respondents that the Grade Structure in the Industrial trades of the Defence Artisan Staff was modified, vide, Government of India Ministry of Defence Letter No.11(1)/2002/D(Civ.1) dated 20.5.2003 with retrospective effect from 1. 1996 as under:- a) Skilled Grade (SK) Rs.3050-4590 b) Highly Skilled Grade HSG) Rs.4000-6000 c) Master Craftsman Rs.4500-7000 that the grade, Highly Skilled Grade (HSG) was formed, by merging the erstwhile Highly Skilled Grade II and Highly Skilled Grade-I; that subsequent to issue of the Government Order dated 20.5.2003, HS-II were clubbed together and a panel of Highly Skilled Grade (HSG) was drawn for the purpose of promotion/placement; that the skilled personnel (SK) are now to be promoted to the Highly Skilled Grade (HSG) subject to their passing the trade test for HSG and fulfilling other criteria required for promotion; that the syllabus of trade test for HSG is being prepared by the Engineer-in-Chiefs Branch, Army Head Quarters, New Delhi; that the Engineer-in-Chiefs Branch had issued a directive that the syllabus for the erstwhile HS-II and HS-I is to be combined together for the purpose of trade test, till the new syllabus for HSG is finalised/issued; that the salient features of the modification are as under:- a)The grades of Highly Skilled Grade II (HS-II) and Highly Skilled Grade-I (HS-I) stand eliminated from the hierarchy. b)For promotion from Skilled (SK) to Highly Skilled Grade (HSG) one has to pass trade test for Highly Skilled Grade (HSG) for which syllabus for erstwhile HS-II and HS-I are combined till formulation of fresh syllabus. that the Petitioner has passed the trade test, SK to HS-II for ACP, but he was not appointed in HS-II Category; that following the order dated 20.5.2003, mentioned above Commander Works Engineer (Navy), Chennai directed the Garrison Engineer (Maint.), Naval Air Station to arrange for trade test, since the Petitioner failed to appear for the trade test conducted in February 2007; that the Tribunal rightly directed to conduct the said test and the same was conducted on 112. 2007, but the Petitioner did not appear and prayed for dismissal of this Writ Petition. 5.The Tribunal found that the Petitioner had undergone test relating to HSG-II alone and hence, necessary test for HS-1 is to be conducted to the Petitioner herein and directed accordingly. 2007, but the Petitioner did not appear and prayed for dismissal of this Writ Petition. 5.The Tribunal found that the Petitioner had undergone test relating to HSG-II alone and hence, necessary test for HS-1 is to be conducted to the Petitioner herein and directed accordingly. 6.The learned counsel on either side have reiterated the above said contentions. 7.This court carefully considered the arguments of the learned counsel on either side and also perused the material records placed. 8.It is an admitted fact that the Petitioner herein, while he was in the Grade of Skilled Electrician, he has appeared in the trade test conducted in the year 2002 for promotion to HSG-II, but, the results were declared belatedly only on 211. 2004, however, he passed in the test. In the meanwhile, both the HS-I and HS-II Grades were merged, by order dated 20.5.2003, with retrospective effect from 1. 1996. In other words, HSG-II and HSG-I stand eliminated from the hierarchy. Indeed, it is admitted that a panel for HSG was drawn for the purpose of promotion and placement. Now, SK Personnel are being promoted, subject to their passing trade test for HSG, which is stated to have the syllabus of combined HSG-II and HSG-I. In this case, the Petitioner passed the trade test for HSG-II, conducted in the year 2002 and hence, directing him to undergo the said test, which consists of more or less the identical syllabus or part of the syllabus, is not reasonable. Particularly, the Petitioners result was belatedly declared in the year 2004 for no fault of him. It is also not explained by the Respondents as to why the result of the Petitioner was belatedly declared. The Respondents failed to formulate a proper scheme, considering the peculiar case of the person, like the Petitioner herein at that time of merger, but they failed. On the other hand, they delayed the declaration of the result of the HSG-II test for two years and thus the Petitioner has lost substantial period of his service in getting promotion of HSG, however, he confines his relief from 211. 2004. On the other hand, they delayed the declaration of the result of the HSG-II test for two years and thus the Petitioner has lost substantial period of his service in getting promotion of HSG, however, he confines his relief from 211. 2004. In view of the said facts, this court is of the considered view that the impugned order passed by the Tribunal, directing the Respondents to conduct the trade test for HS-I to the Petitioner is liable to be set aside and accordingly, it is set aside and the Respondents are directed to give promotion to the Petitioner as HS from the date of passing of the test, i.e. 211. 2004 and the same shall be implemented within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. This Writ Petition is disposed of, on the above terms. No costs. Consequently, the connected MP is closed.