JUDGMENT : Mohammad Yaqoob Mir, J. 1. The grievances projected by the petitioner are: (i) That he was eligible for promotion to the post of Naib Subedar (GD) on 27.02.2005 but has been promoted on 01.11.2006. (ii) That he was due for further promotion, to the post of Subedar after having completed three years of requisite service as Naib Subedar (GD). (iii) In case he would have been promoted to Naib Subedar when it became due he would have been promoted to Subedar Major. 2. In short, the case of the petitioner is that, if he would have been considered and promoted on due dates, as on date he would have been holding the post of Subedar Major. 3. Admittedly, the petitioner was appointed as Rifleman in the Respondent Department on 27.02.1987, has been promoted to the rank of Lance Naik (GD) on 10.02.1990 and thereafter, promoted to the post of Naik (GD) on 13.11.1992. Subsequently, a rank structure of all CMPMFs were rationalised in pursuance to Home Affairs letter No. 27012/1/97 P C Cell/PF.I dated 10.10.1997, the rank of Naik was merged with the rank of Serial No. 05 Regular List Havildar w.e.f. 10.10.1997, therefore, the position of the petitioner was merged in the rank of Havildar w.e.f. 10.10.1997. 4. It is specifically pleaded by the respondents that the promotion from Havildar to the rank of Naib Subedar is subject to the criteria i.e., (1) Educational criteria, (2) Length of service, (3) ACR criteria and (4) Medical category. 5. The contention of the petitioner is that he had completed 18 years of service in total out of which 5 years of service as Havildar, therefore, became eligible for next promotion to the post of Naib Subedar (GD) on 27.02.2005, but instead he had been promoted on 01.11.2006 which position is not denied. However, the respondents have made it clear that in terms of Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Personnel and Training) vide OM No. 22011/9/98-Estt(D) dated 08.09.1998, the personnel who are meeting the qualitative requirements on first January of the relevant year will only be considered for promotion during that year. The petitioner had not completed 18 years of service on the crucial date i.e., 01.01.2005, therefore, was not considered for promotion during the year 2005. 6. The petitioner had not completed 18 years of service on the crucial date i.e., 01.01.2005, therefore, was not considered for promotion during the year 2005. 6. Meeting the requisite criteria for promotion is a first step but same is controlled by another important condition i.e., availability of vacancies. A personnel could claim promotion only against an available vacancy, if vacancy is not available, personnel cannot be considered for promotion. 7. The petitioner no doubt became eligible for the post of Naib Subedar (GD) on 01.02.2005 but not as on 01.01.2005, therefore, he was rightly not considered for promotion during that year. While considering him in the year 2006 on his own turn has been promoted to the post of Naib Subedar (GD) on 01.11.2006. 8. Further promotion to the post of Subedar was dependent upon the availability of the vacancies which according to the respondents were not available, therefore, there is no question for any consideration for promotion of the petitioner to the post of Subedar. 9. The petitioner has filed a rejoinder affidavit wherein he has not anywhere projected that the vacancy of Subedar was available against which petitioner should have been considered. Therefore, claim of the petitioner to issue a direction for reviewing the position of the seniority and the promotion to the post of Naib Subedar (GD) w.e.f. 27.02.2005 and further promotion to the post of Subedar is totally misplaced. 10. Learned CGC was fair enough to state that as and when vacancy of Subedar will become available, petitioner along with other eligible personnel will be considered. 11. For the stated reasons and circumstances and position as admitted, petition is found to be without merit, accordingly dismissed.