Judgment :- 1 The petitioner has approached this Court with the prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari, to quash the order of the respondent No.R.No.R1/9481/2000, dated 15.05.2000, with consequential relief of issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, to direct the respondent to include the petitioner's name in the panel of Assistants fit for promotion to the post of Superintendent for the year 2000-2001 by not taking into consideration of the pendency of criminal proceedings and conviction in view of Criminal Appeal No.828/1996, pending before this Court. 2 The pleaded case of the petitioner is that he was fully eligible for promotion to the post of Superintendent in the year 2000 – 2001 therefore, he deserved to be included in panel for promotion, as the persons juniors to the petitioner were included. 3 The learned counsel for the State points out that the name of the petitioner was not included in the panel, as charge under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules was pending against the petitioner. 4 Once it is not disputed that the charge under Rule 17(b) of Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules was pending against the petitioner, he has no locus standi to challenge the impugned order. 5 It is only when the petitioner acquitted from the charges that he can claim promotion. The petitioner certainly cannot challenge the panel of promotion, merely because his name was not included, once it is not disputed that charge memo under Rule 17(b) of Tamil Nadu Civil Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, was pending. No merit, dismissed. No costs.