Judgment : R. Mahadevan, J. 1. Aggrieved over the order, dated 19.04.2013, made in W.P.(MD).No.4157 of 2013, the appellants are before this Court. The appellants are the respondents in the Writ Petition. 2. The facts are as follows:- The petitioner joined the service as Junior Assistant under the respondents and rose to the level of Superintendent and retired as such on 31.03.2012. The prayer in the Writ Petition was for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the third respondent relating to the Letter No.Na.Ko.No.A2/5690/2010 dated 05.02.2013 and quash the portion in the last paragraph and consequently direct all the respondents to grant notional promotion to the petitioner in the cadre of Supervisor and Superintendent on par with his Junior Thiru.C.Gobinathan i.e. the date on which he assumed charge as Supervisor and Superintendent respectively and consequently to refix the pension and pay the pensionary arrears within a specified time. 3. Such benefit was claimed by the Writ Petitioner, pursuant to the preparation of State-wide seniority list, instead of District-wide seniority, on the basis of G.O.Ms.No.499, Agriculture (AW1) Department, dated 16.08.1995. However, the said request was turned down by the respondents therein resulting in filing the Writ Petition in W.P.(MD).No.4157 of 2013. After hearing both parties, eventually, the claim of the petitioner was allowed by the learned Judge, vide order, dated 19.04.2013. Therefore, the appellants are before this Court. 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that the learned Judge erred in allowing the Writ Petition, on the basis of the District Level Seniority List, and failed to take note of the fact that as per the proceedings of the second appellant, dated 26.04.2013, only State-wide seniority is being followed. He further submitted that the petitioner was working in Ramnad District, whereas, the said C.Gopinathan was working in Velloor District. Therefore, granting notional promotion as Superintendent to the respondent on par with the said C.Gopinathan with effect from 28.10.2004 is not maintainable. 5. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted in view of counter affidavit filed by the appellants in the Writ Petition, particularly, in paragraph 6, the learned Judge allowed the Writ Petition. Now, the respondents cannot turn around to agitate the facts, once again, under the guise of Writ Appeal. 5. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted in view of counter affidavit filed by the appellants in the Writ Petition, particularly, in paragraph 6, the learned Judge allowed the Writ Petition. Now, the respondents cannot turn around to agitate the facts, once again, under the guise of Writ Appeal. He further submitted that only on the basis of the counter affidavit of the third respondent, namely, the Secretary, Ramanathapuram Market Committee, Virudhunagar, wherein, a specific averment had been made to the effect that the claim of the Writ Petitioner was admitted and steps had been taken to implement the G.O in question, the said Writ Petition was allowed by the learned Judge. 6. Since the whole issue revolves around on the basis of the counter affidavit of the third respondent in W.P.(MD).No.4157 of 2013, stated in paragraph Nos. 6 and 7, it would be appropriate to extract the said paragraphs for better understanding of the case. Paragraph 6 of the counter affidavit is extracted hereunder:- “6. I submit that, Based on the above said orders, the Director, Agricultural marketing and Agri Business has taking necessary action to implement the G.O.Ms.No.449 Agriculture (AMI) Department, dated 16.08.1995 and release the Post of Junior Assistant, Supervisor and Superintendent of Market State wide Seniority list for the period form 16.08.1995 to 31.03.2011 as per Director of Agricultural Marketing and Agri Business letter No. MCE1/30268/2010 dated 20.01.2012. Then Revised State wide Seniority list as on 16.08.1995 has been released as per the Director of Agricultural Marketing and Agri Business, letter No.MCE1/30268/2012, Dated 06.11.2012. Based on the G.O.Ms.No.449, Dated:16.08.1995 onwards, promotion panel year has started from 1996-97. Hence, now based on the State wide seniority on 16.08.1995, promotion panel for the post of Superintendent of Market and Supervisor for the year 1996-1997 were prepared and then after up to 31.03.2013 panel preparation is under process. 7. The learned counsel for the third respondent has also submitted that the grievance of the petitioner could be redressed in course of time. 8. 7. The learned counsel for the third respondent has also submitted that the grievance of the petitioner could be redressed in course of time. 8. In the said circumstances, the impugned order is quashed and the writ petition is allowed and a direction is issued to the respondents to promote the petitioner notionally as Supervisor and Superintendent from the date on which his immediate junior was promoted as Supervisor and Superintendent and to re-fix the pension and pay the pension arrears, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. ” 8. A perusal of the order made in W.P.(MD).No.4157 of 2013, dated 19.04.2013, would reveal that after taking note of the counter affidavit only, the learned Judge had allowed the Writ Petition. Especially, taking note of the paragraphs 6 & 7 of the said order, the learned Judge issued a positive direction. When such is the position, it may not be appropriate for the appellants to once again re-agitate the issue under the guise of Writ Appeal. 9. In the result, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. The appellants are directed to grant the benefits to the respondent, as directed by the learned Judge vide its order dated 19.04.2013, made in W.P.(MD).No.4157 of 2013, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.