Judgment The petitioner entered into Government service as Senior Inspector of Co-operative Societies on 10.04.1969. He was promoted as Co-operative Sub Registrar on 23.06.1986. The next avenue of promotion is Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies. The name of the petitioner was not considered in the panel of Co-operative Sub Registrar fit for appointment as Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies for the year 1997-98, as on 010. 1996. His name was also not considered in the subsequent panel for the year 1998-99 as on 010. 1997. He requested the first respondent to include his name in the panel of the year 1998-99 for the post of Deputy Registrar. However, the first respondent passed the impugned order dated 05.01.2001 rejecting the request on the ground that he was suffering the currency of punishment and that was the reason for not including his name in the panel. 2. The petitioner has filed O.A.No.1940 of 2001 (W.P.No.49503 of 2006) to quash the aforesaid order dated 05.01.2001 of the first respondent and for consequential direction to promote him as Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies from the date on which his immediate junior was promoted with all benefits. 3. The respondents filed reply affidavit stating that due to the currency of punishment the name of the petitioner was not included in the panel. 4. Heard Mr.P.Ganesan, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.C.K.Vishnupriya, learned Additional Government Pleader. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that while his juniors were included in the panel, he was not included by the first respondent erroneously. 6. On the other hand, the learned Additional Government Pleader has drawn my attention to Paragraph 10 of the reply affidavit, relevant portion of which is as follows:- Sl.No. Year of the Panel Reasons for non-inclusion 1998-99 1. Currency of punishment awarded in November-1996 (Panel as on 010. 1997) approved in G.O.Ms.No.94, 2. Stoppage of increment for one Co-operation, Food & Consumer year with cumulative effect in Protection Department, January 1999. Dated 19.05.2000 7. It is submitted that the petitioners name was not included in the panel in view of major punishment imposed on him. 8. I have considered the submissions made on either side. As per G.O.Ms.No.368, PNDR Department dated 110. 1993, the currency of the punishment that too of major nature would be certainly a bar for inclusion of his name in the panel. 8. I have considered the submissions made on either side. As per G.O.Ms.No.368, PNDR Department dated 110. 1993, the currency of the punishment that too of major nature would be certainly a bar for inclusion of his name in the panel. Since, it is not disputed that he suffered major punishment as stated in Paragraph 10 of the reply affidavit, there is no infirmity in the impugned order. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.