ORDER IA No. 59 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner is not pressing this application. Hence, dismissed as not pressed, without prejudice to the special leave petitions filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. SLPs (C) Nos. 28488, 27978, 29248 of 2008 and SLP (C) No. ... CCs Nos. 14852-54 of 2008 2. Delink and post separately on 28-8-2008. IA No. 63 3. This application has been filed by 18 Civil Judges (Junior Division) in the cadre of Andhra Pradesh State Subordinate Judicial Service. They were denied promotion to the cadre of Civil Judge (Senior Division). 4. The main contention urged by the applicants is that all the Civil Judges (Junior Division) who were in the zone of consideration for promotion to the cadre of Civil Judge (Senior Division) were subjected to oral interview and based on the marks secured in the interview, promotions were given and 33 candidates, including the present applicants, were denied promotion. 5. The High Court has filed a counter-affidavit/reply stating that they followed the guidelines issued by this Court in Malik Mazhar Sultan (3) v. U.P. Public Service Commission passed on 4-1-2007. As regards the promotion to the cadre of Civil Judge (Senior Division), in the said judgment, this Court had given a direction under clause (4). It states that for the purpose of filling up vacancies in the cadre of Civil Judge (Senior Division) to be filled by promotion: "... Viva voce criteria" and it was further stated: "(a) ACRs for last five years; (b) Evaluation of judgments furnished; and (c) Performance in the oral interview." 6. Promotion from the cadre of Civil Judge (Junior Division) to Civil Judge (Senior Division) is the first promotion stage in the Subordinate Judicial Service. All these officers must have worked for more than five years in the State Subordinate Service and in some cases they would have got promotion as Civil Judge (Senior Division) only after completion of 10 years of service as Civil Judge (Junior Division). So their performance is evaluated on the basis of their past ACRs and also in case of necessity their judgments can also be perused for the purpose of evaluation. But we do not think that these officers should be subjected to oral interview for the purpose of promotion. Normally promotions are given based on the evaluation of the ACRs and seniority. But we do not think that these officers should be subjected to oral interview for the purpose of promotion. Normally promotions are given based on the evaluation of the ACRs and seniority. We do not think that they shall be subjected to oral interview for the purpose of their promotion to Civil Judge (Senior Division). The direction of this Court in the said judgment that for the purpose of promotion, their performance based on oral interview shall also be considered as deleted. If any High Court/State Government has framed any rules pursuant to the direction of this Court, that rule also be treated as deleted. 7. These 33 candidates who have been denied promotion to Civil Judge (Senior Division) would be at liberty to approach the High Court to seek appropriate relief. 8. The IA is disposed of accordingly. Consequently, Writ Petition (C) No. 127 of 2009 is also disposed of. IA No. 65 and WP (C) No. 73 of 2009 9. In this IA and writ petition, the main grievance is that 25% of the direct recruitment is not being complied with. According to these petitioners, the cadre strength of the District and Sessions Judges is 166 including Fast Track Court Judges. Whereas the stand of the High Court that many of the posts are temporary in nature and at any time the tribunals or the Special Judges posts likely to be abolished, they are not taken as part, of permanent cadre and according to the High Court the total cadre strength of the District Judges is 96 and already there are 24 District Judges. As there is dispute regarding the cadre strength, without prejudice to the rights of the petitioners they may agitate the question before the High Court. 10. The IA and writ petition are disposed of accordingly. IA No. 66 11. The petitioners contend that the High Court of Patna is adopting criteria for promotion other than what has been stated in Malik Mazhar Sultan (3) case. The petitioners would be at liberty to approach the High Court. 12. The IA is disposed of accordingly. IAs Nos. 70, 71 and 72 13. Without prejudice to the rights, the IAs are dismissed as withdrawn. IA No. 69 14. No orders required. Court Masters