JUDGMENT : Valmiki J. Mehta, J. 1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the relief that he should be considered for promotion to the post of Technical Assistant in the coming DPC. 2. The relevant requirements for promotion to the post of Technical Assistant under 50% merit quota are as under:- “UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES (UNIVERSTIY OF DELHI) DILSHAD GARDEN, DELHI – 110095 NO.MC/CCS/IV/5/2012 DATED: 13.07.2012 NOTIFICATION The Governing Body in its meeting held on 6th June 2012 has revised the existing Recruitment Rules for the appointment of Technical Assistant under 50% Merit Quota till the University frames fresh Recruitment Rules. The Governing Body after deliberations decided that henceforth 50% of Technical Assistants to be appointed under merit quota shall be filled up from amongst the Laboratory Assistants who have completed three years of regular service in the cadre in the following manner:- 1. Annual confidential Report: Good and above during the last three years; 2. An incumbent Laboratory Assistant not possessing any qualification in the field of MLT i.e. DMLT B.Sc. (MLT), M.Sc. (MLT shall undergo in-service training programme of one year duration followed by an examination to be conducted by the College. 3. An incumbent Laboratory/Assistant possessing DMLT/B.Sc. (MLT)/M.Sc.(MLT) from a recognized institution shall undergo the weeks in service training programme in the College followed by a written examination alongwith the regular batch undergoing one year in service training programme. 4. The percentage of marks obtained in the In-service Training Programme of the college shall determine the merit. Sd/- Deputy Registrar 13/7 Copy to: 1. Medical Superintendent, GTB Hospital/All Heads of the Department for to bring it to the notice of all Staff Members, working in the Department. 2. Notice Board 3. UCMS Web Site.” 3. As per the writ petition, and para 6 thereof, petitioner’s grievance is against four junior candidates namely Sh. Sourabh Gupta, Sh.H.P. Tamta, Sh. Roop Ram Premi and Sh. Vinod Kumar and who sepromotions are challenged on the ground that they are not entitled to 50% merit basis promotion in the coming DPC. These persons have not been impleaded in this petition. 4. Counsel for the petitioner agrees that the petitioner by means of this writ petition seeks promotion as per the 50% merit quota. Vinod Kumar and who sepromotions are challenged on the ground that they are not entitled to 50% merit basis promotion in the coming DPC. These persons have not been impleaded in this petition. 4. Counsel for the petitioner agrees that the petitioner by means of this writ petition seeks promotion as per the 50% merit quota. That being so, there are a total of three requirements which a Lab Assistant must satisfy in order to seek promotion for the post of Technical Assistant. First requirement is of having three consecutive ACRs with the grade “good and above”. Second requirement is that the candidate must either undergo in-service training programme of one year duration followed by an examination to be conducted by the college qua the field of MLT or if the Lab Assistant possesses the qualification of MLT then he is only required to undergo in-service training programme in the college of three weeks. The third requirement is that a candidate who is to be selected, must have higher marks in the in-service training programme conducted by the college. We are presently concerned only with the first requirement inasmuch as the entitlement of the petitioner to appear before the DPC can only be if he has three consecutive Annual Confidential Reports with the grade “good and above” in three years prior to holding of the DPC. 5. On repeated queries the counsel for the petitioner agrees that there is no averment made in the petition that the petitioner has three consecutive ACRs of “good and above” and what is only argued is that the adverse entries have not been communicated to the petitioner. What are the adverse entries, whether at all there is any downgrading of the petitioner, what was the year for which the adverse entries are there, are all aspects which are conspicuous by their absence in the writ petition. 6. Therefore, it can safely be presumed that the petitioner does not satisfy the requirement to be called for promotion under the 50% merit quota. 7. In view of the fact that the petitioner does not meet the requirement of having the qualification of three consecutive ACRs of “good and above” for being considered by the DPC, the petitioner cannot succeed in this writ petition. 7. In view of the fact that the petitioner does not meet the requirement of having the qualification of three consecutive ACRs of “good and above” for being considered by the DPC, the petitioner cannot succeed in this writ petition. Whether any other person is or is not wrongly called by DPC cannot be an aspect in this writ petition because it is the claim of the petitioner which is to be considered independently of any other alleged person not meeting the requirement. 8. Writ petition is accordingly dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.