JUDGMENT 1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking direction to the respondents to promote the petitioner as Assistants Accounts Officer before his retirement i.e., 31.12.2013, on the basis of his representations dated 21.11.201 and 05.12.2013, in the light of the order dated 14.03.2012 in W.P.No.28673 of 2010. 2. The petitioner hails from an agriculturist family in the remote village of Chinnaperichpalayam. He is a B.Sc. Graduate. Since the agriculture land of the petitioner was acquired by the respondent Electricity Board, he was provided employment assistance as Helper Trainee on 07.06.1993. He was made permanent on 01.09.1994 as Helper. Thereafter, on 01.09.1995, he was appointed as Junior Assistant. 3. The petitioner passed Accounts test subordinate service (Part-I) and subsequently, he was promoted as Assistant on 11.09.1997. Thereafter, he passed Accounts Test Lower in February 2001 and Higher Grade in February 2003 and he was given promotion as Selection Grade Assistant on 11.09.2006. The next avenue of promotion is Accounts Supervisor. For the said post, the prescribed qualification is to pass Accounts Test Lower Grade and since the petitioner passed the same, based on his seniority, he was promoted as Accounts Supervisor on 06.01.2007. Further, the next avenue of promotion is Assistant Accounts Officer. A panel was prepared for promotion to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer on 08.02.2011 for the crucial date 25.03.2010. In that panel, the petitioner’s name is found in Serial No.360 and his seniority number is 2061. Though 398 Accounts Supervisors were selected and approved by the promotion committee by the respondents vide CMD TANGEDCO proceedings No.7. However, 324 Accounts Supervisors were alone promoted as Assistant Accounts Officer. Even though the details of the eligible Accounts Supervisor for promotion to the post of Assistants Accounts Officer were called for, the said panel for the year 2012 was not released. 4. According to the petitioner, no employee was promoted from the post of Accounts Supervisor to Assistant Accounts Officer in the year 2012, which is contrary to the board regulation and also B.P.Ms.(Ch).No.212, dated 12.06.1987. Hence, the petitioner made a representation dated 23.08.2013, the respondents requesting them to promote him as Assistant Accounts Officer. 4. According to the petitioner, no employee was promoted from the post of Accounts Supervisor to Assistant Accounts Officer in the year 2012, which is contrary to the board regulation and also B.P.Ms.(Ch).No.212, dated 12.06.1987. Hence, the petitioner made a representation dated 23.08.2013, the respondents requesting them to promote him as Assistant Accounts Officer. After lapse of one year, the respondent Board, without considering the representation of the petitioner, published the panel for promotion to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer for the crucial dated 25.03.2012, vide CMD TANGEDCO Proceedings No.29 (Administrative Branch), dated 23.03.2013 and 94 Accounts Supervisors were promoted as Assistant Accounts Officer. But, the petitioner’s name was not included in the panel for promotion to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer. 5. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed a writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.5161 of 2013, on 23.03.2013. Since the petitioner is going to retire from service on 31.12.2013, he made representations to the second respondent on 21.11.2013 and 05.12.2013 requesting him to promote him as Assistant Accounts Officer. 6. The petitioner submitted that he is entitled to promote as Assistant Accounts Officer as the respondent promoted Thiru. Xavier, who was promoted on the last date of his retirement from the post of Under Secretary to Deputy Secretary against the leave vacancy and Tmt. Saraswathy was promoted as Personal Officer to Senior Personal Officer on the last date of her retirement. He further submitted that if he would be promoted as Assistant Accounts Officer, he would get pension and terminal benefits. He had also submitted that this issue is squarely covered by Judgment of this Court in W.P.No.28673 of 2013 dated 14.03.2012. But, till date, the respondents have not considered the representation of the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. 8. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side, this Court directs the respondents to consider representations of the petitioner dated 21.11.2013 and 05.12.2013, in the light of the order dated 14.03.2012 in W.P.No.28673 of 2010 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 9. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.