JUDGMENT AND ORDER : 1. Heard Mr. Somik Deb and Mr. K. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Ms. A.S. Lodh, learned Addl. G.A. appearing for the respondents. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has urged this Court for directing the respondents to appoint him in the post of Driver, Group-C as he has been driving the vehicle all along, at least regularly since 24.12.1992. The respondents have not denied that fact. The petitioner was originally appointed by the order dated 08.06.1983 (Annexure-A to the writ petition) as the Peon in the office of the District Magistrate and Collector, South Tripura, Udaipur. 3. Mr. Somik Deb, learned counsel having referred to the working certificate dated 23.12.1992 (Annexure-D to the writ petition), the order dated 17.03.2005 (Annexure-E to the writ petition), the office order dated 12.05.2005 (Annexure-F to the writ petition), the Memorandum dated 06.01.2003 (Annexure-G to the writ petition) and the order dated 29.09.2006 (Annexure-H to the writ petition) has robustly contended that these documents stand to vindicate that the petitioner has been discharging the duties as the Driver since 09.01.1989. Despite that he has not been appointed regularly in the post of the Driver. On 26.10.2016, the petitioner having been persuaded by the circumstances had placed the demand for his appointment in the post of the Driver on consideration of his service rendered as the Driver, even though he was substantively appointed as the Peon under the District Magistrate and Collector, Gomati, Udaipur. 4. In response to the said notice dated 26.10.2016 (Annexure-I to the writ petition) the District Magistrate and Collector, Gomati District, Udaipur by the communication dated 05.11.2016 (Annexure-J to the writ petition) had apprised, a process has been initiated to examine whether the petitioner can be given any relief or not, but nothing has happened so far and hence the petitioner has filed this writ petition. 5. The respondents by filing their counter affidavit have submitted that there is no scope to appoint the petitioner as the Driver. Even no financial benefit can be granted to him as he was appointed as Peon (Group-D) under the District Magistrate and Collector, South Tripura, now Gomati District. However, Ms. A.S. Lodh, learned Addl. 5. The respondents by filing their counter affidavit have submitted that there is no scope to appoint the petitioner as the Driver. Even no financial benefit can be granted to him as he was appointed as Peon (Group-D) under the District Magistrate and Collector, South Tripura, now Gomati District. However, Ms. A.S. Lodh, learned Addl. G.A. has submitted that the Government has taken a progressive policy which is reflected in the Memorandum dated 14.05.2012 (Annexure-R/1 to the counter affidavit) wherein a provision has been made to the effect that 30% of the posts in the Tripura Government Driver's Cadre shall be filled up by promotion from the regular Group-D employees having licence for driving vehicles. For this purpose, the concerned Department shall furnish particulars of the eligible regular Group-D employees along with the verified reservation roster certified by the SC and ST Welfare Department as per the proforma enclosed with the said Memorandum dated 14.05.2012. According to Ms. Lodh, the petitioner’s name had not been recommended and therefore his case was not considered. 6. Having appreciated the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, this Court is of the view that the respondents have a duty to the petitioner to recommend his name for promotion to the post of Driver, Group-C under the Tripura Government Vehicles Driver's Service in terms of the said Memorandum dated 14.05.2012 (Annexure- R/1 to the counter affidavit). 7. As Mr. Somik Deb, learned counsel has pointed out that within a very short while the petitioner would superannuate, it is required that a direction be issued on the respondents to recommend and to consider his case for promotion with expedition as the petitioner is one of the senior most Group-D employees under the Revenue Department. 8. Be that as it may, the respondents are directed to recommend the name of the petitioner for consideration of his case for promotion to the post of the Driver, Group-C under the 30% quota as stated above and such recommendation shall be made within a period of six weeks from the day when the petitioner shall submit a copy of this order. Thereafter, the petitioner shall be allowed to participate in the driving test as usually taken for consideration for appointment on promotion to the post of Driver, Group-C under that 30% quota as created by the said Memorandum dated 14.05.2012 (Annexure-R/1 to the reply filed the respondents). Thereafter, the petitioner shall be allowed to participate in the driving test as usually taken for consideration for appointment on promotion to the post of Driver, Group-C under that 30% quota as created by the said Memorandum dated 14.05.2012 (Annexure-R/1 to the reply filed the respondents). 9. If the petitioner qualifies the screening test he shall be promoted against the available vacancy under the said 30% quota having due regard to his seniority. It is expected that the said driving test be conducted within a period of six months positively from the day of this order. 10. Having observed thus, this writ petition stands allowed to the extent as indicated above. There shall be no order as to cost.