Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, J.;— Heard Sri Gulab Chandra learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Anshu Chaudhary for the respondent nos.2 and 3 and the learned standing counsel for the respondent no.1. This writ petition questions the correctness of the order dated 31.12.2012 passed by the Upper Mukhya Adhikari, Zila Panchayat, Farrukhabad whereby the promotion order of the petitioner dated 12.4.2012 has been cancelled with immediate effect. The back ground of the case is that the petitioner was working as a clerk in the office of Zila Panchayat and sought promotion to the post of Head Clerk. The petitioner had been given charge as Office Superintendent against which he was claiming further promotion under the U.P.Zila Panchayat Sewa Niyamawali, 1970. The request of the petitioner for grant of regular promotion to the post of Office Superintendent/Accounts Officer was considered and a resolution was passed on 30.6.2011 in favour of the petitioner. Since the said resolution was not given effect the petitioner filed Writ Petition No.5007 of 2012 in which a direction was issued to take a final decision within two months. A copy of the said judgment dated 30.1.2012 is on record. A Selection Committee was constituted and accordingly a decision was taken on 4.4.2012 by the said Committee to grant regular promotion to the petitioner. The decision of the Selection Committee was not endorsed by the respondent Chairman who was resisting the same. The Upper Mukhya Adhikari passed order on 12.4.2012 for promoting the petitioner on regular post and copy of the said order is Annexure 10 to the writ petition. The Chairman withheld the execution of the said promotion order without any reason as a result whereof the petitioner again filed Writ Petition No.52979 of 2012 which was disposed of on 10.10.2012 directing the Chairman to pass orders within six weeks. The Chairman failed to comply with the said order as a result whereof a Contempt Application No.6251 of 2012 was filed which was disposed of on 3.1.2013 with a direction to the Chairman to comply with the order and in the event the order is not complied with, the petitioner was given liberty to approach the contempt jurisdiction again. The Upper Mukhya Adhikari passed the order dated 31.12.2012 which is obviously prior to the direction issued by the Court referred to herein above. The Upper Mukhya Adhikari passed the order dated 31.12.2012 which is obviously prior to the direction issued by the Court referred to herein above. The petitioner contends that an order which has been passed on the pressure of the Chairman is an illegal order and is in violation of principles of natural justice. Sri Anshu Chaudhary learned counsel for the Zila Panchayat contends that no final resolution has been passed till date nor has the Chairman taken any decision in this matter as such the writ petition is premature. In the opinion of the Court the impugned order appears to have been passed on vague reasons and is malicious inasmuch as the same proceeds on the assumption of sanction having not been given by the competent authority. The aforesaid order was obviously unjustified inasmuch the matter had to be decided by the Chairman as per judgment dated 10.10.2012. The Upper Mukha Adhikari acted in haste in passing the order of cancellation dated 12.4.2012 without opportunity to the petitioner which appears to have been done on the directions of the Chairman. In the aforesaid circumstances the order dated 31.12.2012 appears to be unjustified. The respondents have preempted the directions of this Court and the same time the Chairman has failed to act in accordance with law as a result whereof the petitioner had to file two writ petitions and a contempt petition. Accordingly the order dated 31.12.2012 being in violation of principles of natural justice and also being malicious is hereby quashed. The Chairman, Zila Panchayat Farrukhabad will now proceed to comply with the directions issued on 10.10.2012 and 3.1.2013 within three weeks.The order shall be a speaking order taking notice of the claim of the promotion of the petitioner in accordance with rules and shall be passed by the competent authority in accordance with service rules without any further delay. The writ petition is allowed. No order as to costs. _____________