JUDGMENT I. A. No. 2665 of 2012 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. On the last date i.e. on 11.02.2013, the matter was adjourned by passing following orders:- “The instant contempt is being pursued for disobedience of the order dated 30January 2010 passedinWPSNo.2153/2005.Operative portion of the order dated 30anuary 2010 contained at Para-13 is being quoted here-in-below: “13. In the light of the above discussions and finding merit in this application, the same is allowed. The respondent authorities are directed to correct the notification dated 31.05.2004 (Annexure-10) by computing the period of three years of the petitioner's teaching experience from 12.02.1982 and fixing the date of his promotion to the post of Assistant Professor as 12.02.1985. The compliance of this order must be carried out by the concerned authorities of the respondents within two months and the same be communicated to the petitioner effectively. The petitioner shall be entitled to all consequential benefits pursuant to the correction of the date of his promotion to the post of Assistant Professor.” 2. According to the respondent State, in obedience of the instant order, the petitioner's date of promotion as Assistant Professor has been shifted back to 12th February 1985 which has been brought on record by way of show-cause dated 28th August 2010 containing notification dated 27th August 2010. It has been further submitted that the petitioner's promotion to the post of Associate Professor has also been shifted to 12th February 1990 by the notification dated 03rd September 2010 which has also been brought on record by way of show-cause dated 6th September 2010. Counsel for the petitioner however submits that by the direction passed by this court in that order, opposite parties are also required to grant him promotion to the post of Professor as well. In order to ascertain as to what was the relief which was originally sought in the writ petition, let the records of W.P.(S) No. 2153/2005 be placed along with the case. List the case after one week.” 3. The record of W.P.(S) No.2153 of 2005 has been placed today alongwith the instant contempt petition. 4. In order to ascertain as to what was the relief which was originally sought in the writ petition, let the records of W.P.(S) No. 2153/2005 be placed along with the case. List the case after one week.” 3. The record of W.P.(S) No.2153 of 2005 has been placed today alongwith the instant contempt petition. 4. The prayer made in the writ petition is quoted herein under:- “(a) For the issuance of appropriate writ/writs order/orders, direction/directions commanding upon the respondents to correct the notification No.141 (2) Health dated 31.05.04 (Annexure-10) whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been promoted as Assistant Professor w.e.f. 21.05.2000 by considering the petitioner' date of holding of teaching post artificially as 21.05.97 (by considering three years of teaching experience petitioner being promoted w.e.f. 21.05.2000) although the petitioner is holding teaching post equivalent to tutor as a pathologist in Artificial Kidney Unit in the Medicine Department on and from 12.02.82 and thus the petitioner is entitled to be promoted w.e.f. 12.2.85. (b) For the issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions commanding upon the respondents to suitably modify the aforesaid notification and correct the date of promotion of petitioner as Assistant Professor from 21.05.2000 to 12.2.1985 since the petitioner had joined the teaching post on 12.2.1982 in the Post of as a pathologist in Artificial Kidney Unit in the Medicine Department and continued in the same post and he completed three years teaching experience on 12.2.1985 and as per the rules the date of promotion of the petitioner is to be antedated to 12.2.1985. (c) For the issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions or a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the notification No.141(2) Health dated 31.05.02 (Annexure-10) to limited extend where by the artificial date of 21.05.97 has been indicated for the petitioner holding the teaching post of tutor and thus promoted the petitioner with effect from an artificial date of 21.05.2000 on that basis which is grossly illegal and arbitrary as the petitioner has continued in the teaching post from 12.2.1982 and thus entitled to be promoted on attaining three years of teaching experience on and from 12.2.1985 and/or to grant a consequential benefits there to. (d) Pass such other writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions as Your Lordship may deems fit and proper.” 5. (d) Pass such other writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions as Your Lordship may deems fit and proper.” 5. As already indicated in the order dated 11.02.2013, pursuant to the direction passed in W. P. (S) No. 2153 of 2005, vide judgment dated 30.01.2010, operative part of which is quoted hereinabove, admittedly, the petitioner's date of promotion as Assistant Professor has been shifted back to 12.02.1985, which has been brought on record by way of show cause dated 28.08.2010 containing notification dated 27.08.2010. However, the petitioner's promotion to the post of Associate Professor has also been shifted to 12.02.1990 by the notification dated 03.09.2010, which has also been brought on record by way of show cause dated 06.09.2010. 6. This contempt was prosecuted against the opposite party as according to the petitioner by virtue of the judgment dated 30.01.2010 referred hereinabove, the petitioner was also entitled to be granted promotion to the post of Professor as a consequential relief. 7. In order to ascertain whether the contention of the petitioner is justified or not, the records of the said writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 2153 of 2005 were ordered to be placed. From the prayer made in the said writ petition, which is quoted here-in-abaove, it in no way reflects that the petitioner had approached this Court for grant of promotion on the post of Professor. Admittedly, he was aggrieved because of wrong date of promotion to the post of Assistant Professor as his teaching experience had not been taken into account as tutor. It is trite to say that for each step in the ladder of promotion an aggrieved person has an independent cause of action. The cause of action for which the petitioner has approached this Court, he was allowed the relief. However, if he has not been granted promotion to the post of Professor for one reason or the other, he is at liberty to agitate the same in a fresh proceeding. However, no grounds are made out to show wilful and deliberate disobedience of the judgment and order passed by this Court in W. P. (S) No. 2513 of 2005 dated 30.01.2010. Accordingly, Contempt Proceedings are dropped and opposite parties are discharged of notice. 8. I. A. No. 2665 of 2012 also stands disposed of.