JUDGMENT Deputy Director Estates, Kashmir, Srinagar vide his communication dated 03rd September, 2013 send the recommendations made by Divisional Level Departmental Promotion Committee for short “DPC”, which was held on 22nd August, 2013, to Director, Estates, Jammu and Kashmir Government, Civil Sectt., Srinagar. The communication and copy of the minutes of the meeting have been placed on record of writ petition as annexure “P-4”. The Divisional Level Departmental Promotion Committee considered the employees working in the department at different levels for their promotion to the next higher post. The case of the petitioner no. 1 was also considered by Divisional Level Departmental Promotion Committee. At serial 3 of the recommendations of the Divisional Level DPC, the recommendation was made in respect of petitioner no. 1. The DPC considered the claim of the petitioner no. 1 for being appointed by way of promotion on one available post of Electrician. The claim of the petitioner was considered in accordance with the J&K Estates (Subordinate) Services Recruitment Rule, 1997. After feeling satisfied that the petitioner was eligible in terms of aforesaid rules, recommendation was made for his appointment by way of promotion from the post of Helper to that of Electrician in the pay scale of 5200-20200 with grade pay 2400 prospectively against the available post under promotion quota. Similarly claim of the petitioner no. 2 was considered and when it was found that petitioner no. 2 satisfied the eligibility requirement, he was recommended for being appointed by way of promotion on the post of Plumber in the pay scale of 5200-20200 with grade pay of 2400 prospectively against the available post of Plumber under promotional quota. The grievances of the petitioners in this petition is that while the competent authority issued promotion orders in favour of the other employees whose recommendation was made by the DPC but no promotion order was issued in their favour. The respondents in their objections have in fact admitted that DPC was convened on 22nd August, 2013 and recommendation dated 03rd September, 2013 were received by respondent no. 2. Nothing, however, is stated as to why and for what reasons, promotion orders have not been issued in favour of the petitioners. Assertion of the petitioners that, recommendations in respect of other persons were accepted and promotions orders issued, has not been denied by the respondents in the objections. 2. Nothing, however, is stated as to why and for what reasons, promotion orders have not been issued in favour of the petitioners. Assertion of the petitioners that, recommendations in respect of other persons were accepted and promotions orders issued, has not been denied by the respondents in the objections. When an employee is appointed in services, he attains status and thereafter his services is governed by the Statutory service rules. In terms of the service rules, the petitioners has to be provided promotion to the next higher post. The respondents in view of the mandate contained in Jammu & Kashmir Civil Services (Reference of Vacancies and Holding of Meetings of Departmental Promotion Committee) Rules, 2005( for short “Rules of 2005”) are duty bound to convene meeting of the DPCs’ at least twice a year. The Rules of 2005 assume significance, inasmuch as, it is now mandated by Statutory rules that the claim of the eligible candidates is to be considered for being promoted to the next higher post, at least twice a year. The consideration of the claim of an employee to the next higher post and appointment by way of promotion to the next higher post rejuvenates the employees to perform his duties to the best of his abilities. The appointment by way of promotion to the higher post is an essential and integral component of the service and constitute an important service right of an employee. In this case though the petitioners were recommended for being appointed by way of promotion to the next higher post, but promotion orders were not issued. No reasons is put forth for non issuance of promotion orders. Respondents have acted illegally and arbitrarily in not issuing promotion orders in favour of the petitioners, more so when no reasons has been put forth for not promoting them to next higher post. For the above stated reasons, this writ petition alongwith connected IA(s) is disposed of in the following manner: Respondent no. 2 is directed to issue promotion order in favour of the petitioners on the basis of recommendations made by the Divisional Level Departmental Promotion Committee, minutes whereof have been send to the said authority by Deputy Director, Estates, Kashmir vide his communication dated 03rd September, 2015. 2 is directed to issue promotion order in favour of the petitioners on the basis of recommendations made by the Divisional Level Departmental Promotion Committee, minutes whereof have been send to the said authority by Deputy Director, Estates, Kashmir vide his communication dated 03rd September, 2015. Since the petitioners have been arbitrarily denied appointment by way of promotion from the date promotions have been given to other employees, who were recommended for promotion alongwith petitioners, the respondent no. 2 shall give benefit of promotion to the petitioners from the date it has been given to others, who were recommended for being appointed by way of promotion to the next higher post alongwith them. The promotional orders will have notional effect, till date the petitioners join on promotional post in pursuance of promotional orders to be issued by the respondent no. 2. Respondent no. 2 to issue promotion orders within one week from the date copy of this order is received. Disposed of as above.