JUDGMENT Rajan Roy,J. Heard. 2. The petitioner herein was considered for promotion to the Group 'C' post under the quota prescribed for the said purpose by the rules known as The Uttar Pradesh Subordinate Offices Ministerial Group 'C' Posts of the Lowest Grade (Recruitment by Promotion) Rules 2001 (hereinafter referred as 'Rules of 2001'). The petitioner who was working as a Group 'D' employee was eligible under the said rules for such consideration therefore he was considered as aforesaid sometimes in the year 2012. 3. The record reveals that out of the sanctioned promotional posts 5 posts were to be filled by way of promotion from Group 'D' employees as aforesaid. Out of these two were to be filled by those who possessed the qualification of Intermediate while the remaining were to be filled from those whose educational qualification was High School, was of course subject to fulfillment of other requisites. The departmental examination was held on 10.7.2012. In the merit-list prepared on the basis of the said examination, a copy of which is as Annexure-2 to the writ petition, the petitioner was placed at serial no. 5. The merit-list comprised of 8 persons out of whom one i.e. the candidate at serial no. 2 was appointed against the post of Junior Assistant considering his qualification of intermediate. 4. In the merit which is mentioned in annexure-2 to the writ petition 3 posts were filled from those Group 'D' employees who fulfilled the High School qualification. Although 1 post remained to be filled but instead of filling the same from the aforesaid merit-list, which could have resulted in the appointment of the petitioner, the opposite parties again advertised the said vacancy for being filled only from such Group 'D' employees who possessed the qualification of High School alone and not intermediate. In these circumstances the petitioner in spite of being at serial no. 5 in the merit list and possessing the qualification of intermediate is alleged to have been arbitrarily and illegally deprived of his right of being promoted as per rules in spite of being found suitable for the same. 5. Sri Neeraj Chaurasia, learned counsel appearing for the State submits that there is a bifurcation of quota to be filled by promotion of Group 'D' employees. 5. Sri Neeraj Chaurasia, learned counsel appearing for the State submits that there is a bifurcation of quota to be filled by promotion of Group 'D' employees. 5% posts are to be filled from such employees who possess the qualification of Intermediate whereas the remaining 15% are to be filled from such Group 'D' employees who possess the qualification of High School only, and not Intermediate. 6. On being asked as to what could be the rationale for filling up 15% posts only from High School candidates while depriving Group 'D' employees possessing the higher qualification of Intermediate from being considered against the said 15% quota and as to whether there was any such stipulation in the relevant rules, Shri Chaurasia on a perusal of the rules fairly submits that the rules did not say so, however, he insisted that if the 15% quota is also allowed to be filled from the Group 'D' employees possessing qualification of Intermediate then all the posts would get filled by these candidates, to the detriment of Group 'D' employees who possess the qualification of High School. The relevant rules in this regard are known as U.P. Subordinate Offices Ministerial Group 'C' Posts of the Lowest Grade (Recruitment by Promotion) Rules 2001 which have been made under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India in supersession of all existing rules and orders on the subject for regulating recruitment by promotion to Ministerial Group 'C' posts of the lowest grade from amongst group 'D' employees in the subordinate offices of the government. Rule 5 thereof reads as under: "5. Source of recruitment: - Recruitment to twenty percent of the vacancies of the ministerial group 'C' posts of the lowest grade in a subordinate office shall be made by promotion through the Selection Committee from the following sources: (1) Fifteen per cent from amongst such substantively appointed group 'D' employees who have passed the High School Examination of the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, Uttar Pradesh or an examination recognized by the Government as equivalent thereto and who have completed five years service as such on the first day of the year of recruitment. (2) Five per cent from amongst such substantively appointed Group 'D' employees who have passed the Intermediate Education of the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, Uttar Pradesh or an examination recognized by the Government as equivalent thereto and who have completed five years service as such on the first day of the year of recruitment." 7. On a bare persal of the aforesaid Rule 5 this court does not find any such stipulation in sub-rule (1) thereof to the effect that 15% Group 'C' posts of the lowest grade in a subordinate office shall be filled by promotion through the Selection Committee from amongst substantively appointed Group 'D' employees who have passed High School examination only of the Board of High School and Intermediate Education or an examination equivalent thereto. The word 'only' does not find mention in the said sub-rule. On a plain and simple reading of the sub-rule what comes out is that anybody who possesses the qualification of High School is eligible for being considered for promotion under this 15% quota. The Rule does not suggest even remotely that those who possess the qualification of High School only (and not those who possess the qualification of intermediate) are to be considered against this 15% quota. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 5 provides a 5% quota for those who possess the qualification of intermediate. The rationale behind the 5% quota is that one who possesses higher qualification, even if he is lower in seniority or in the merit list would be entitled to promotion to the Group 'C' post based on his higher qualification. With this intent sub-rule (2) has been made, accordingly remaining 15% posts have been left for promotion of others having minimum qualification of High School. 8. The reasoning suggested by Shri Chaurasia apart from the fact that it is not borne out from a plain and simple reading of the rule and therefore unacceptable, is also unacceptable for the reason it is apparently unreasonable as if it is accepted it would mean that a person possessing higher qualification will not get promoted whereas one who possesses lower qualification would get promoted to the Group 'C' post, which is not the intent of the rules. It would be quite unreasonable that a person possessing a higher qualification and eligible for promotion under the 5% quota would be denied promotion only because the vacancy allegedly earmarked for the said quota is not available and he is not permitted to be considered for promotion under the 15% quota meant for High School candidates, though, he is also a High School as the qualification of Intermediate cannot be acquired without qualifying the High School Examination. Apparently the reasoning suggested by Sri Chaurasia if accepted would result in arbitrariness. 9. From the scheme of the Rule the court has no doubt that a Group 'D' employee possessing qualification of intermediate is not only entitled for being considered for promotion against the 5% quota meant exclusively for them but also against the 15% quota prescribed for those possessing the qualification of High School, as, such a candidate also possesses the qualification of High School. 10. For the reasons aforesaid this court has no doubt in in its mind that the petitioner was denied promotion to Group 'C' post to which he was entitled based on the selection held on 10.7.2012 in terms of rules of 2001 as aforesaid. No other rule or order of the Governmnt to the country has been placed before the court nor any other argument has been advanced. 11. The record also reveals that though subsequently 1 of the 5 posts was re-advertised, but against it three candidates were appointed, however, without going into this question any further as the notification dated 5.7.2013 re-advertising one of the posts has also been acted upon, therefore, there is no question of it being quashed, but, considering the apparent illegality which amounts to denial of fundamental rights of the petitioner enshrined under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India it is ordered that he shall be treated as promoted to the Group 'C' post notionally with effect from the date of promotion of others who were promoted on the basis of the examination held on 10.7.2012 and whose names figured in the merit list, based thereon. 12. This order shall be complied within 15 days from the receipt of its certified copy. Pay of the petitioner shall be revised and refixed accordingly. Consequences shall follow accordingly as per law. 13. This writ petition is allowed in aforesaid terms.