ORDER : 1. This writ petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India whereby and whereunder a direction has been sought for upon the respondent-state to promote the petitioner as Chief Engineer with due date i.e. with effect from 02.06.2015 on the ground that the sanctioned post of Chief Engineer is available and the petitioner is eligible to be promoted as Chief Engineer. 2. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that he is holding the substantive post of Chief Engineer and as Superintending Engineer he has completed one year of his service and as such he is eligible for promotion as Chief Engineer but it has not been considered, hence, this writ petition. 3. The State-respondent has filed counter affidavit wherein stand has been taken at paragraph 14 of the counter affidavit that the petitioner was not eligible to be considered for promotion to the post of Chief Engineer, however, he has been made Chief Engineer in-charge under notification No.3963 dated 04.12.2015 and while working as Chief Engineer (current charge) he has superannuated from service and as such according to State-respondent since the petitioner is not eligible to be promoted on substantive post of Chief Engineer, his case has not been considered and therefore the stand has been taken that the prayer made by the writ petitioner in the writ petition is not worth to be considered and therefore the writ petition may be dismissed. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and on appreciation of rival submissions, it is evident that the petitioner has sought for a direction to promote him as Chief Engineer on substantive capacity under the Water Resources Department on the ground that petitioner has been granted substantive promotion as Superintending Engineer and on such basis he has completed one year, hence, according to the petitioner he is entitled to be promoted as Chief Engineer. 5. The said stand of the petitioner has been rebutted by the State-respondent in the counter affidavit as would be evident from paragraph no.14 thereof wherein the specific stand has been taken that the petitioner was not eligible prior to 02.06.2015 to be considered for promotion as Chief Engineer, however he has been made Chief Engineer (current charge) vide notification no.3963 dated 04.12.2015. 6. 6. The position of law is that promotion cannot be granted as a matter of right however right for consideration is a fundamental right but subject to the fulfilment of the eligibility condition and also if any junior to the employee has been accorded promotion but so far as the cause of action is considered, the petitioner for promotion as Chief Engineer, no pleading is there that any junior to the petitioner has been accorded promotion as Chief Engineer and so far as eligibility part is concerned, the specific stand has been taken by the State authority in the counter affidavit that he was not eligible to be considered for promotion to the substantive post as Chief Engineer and aforesaid stand of the State-authority has not been rebutted since no response has been filed. 7. Even otherwise also, the petitioner, even if said to be eligible for promotion after 02.06.2015 as has been stated hereinabove that the promotion cannot be sought by way of fundamental right and to get a writ of mandamus commanding upon the State authority to consider the case of one or the other employee for promotion a cause of action has to arise that if any junior to the petitioner if granted promotion, then certainly the employee would have cause of action to seek writ of mandamus commanding upon the State-authority to consider the case of the employee for promotion but that is not the case here since no pleading has been made in the writ petition that any junior to the petitioner has been granted regular promotion as Chief Engineer. 8. In view thereof and on the basis of the reasoning given hereinabove, in the considered view of this Court, the petitioner has failed to make out a case for regular promotion as Chief Engineer and accordingly this writ petition lacks merit and hereby dismissed.