JUDGMENT : DEEPAK ROSHAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioners for the following reliefs: (a) Commanding upon the respondents to grant promotion to the petitioners to the promotional post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) with Pay-scale PB-II, Rs.9,300-34,800/-, Grade Pay of Rs.5,400/- (revised pay-scale Pay Matrix Level 9) under Jharkhand Engineering Services Category 2 since the date when similarly situated or juniors were granted promotion to the said post, with all consequential benefits including monetary benefits. (b) Quashing/setting aside, with all consequences, the reasoned orders dated 18.9.2023 (as contained in Annexure-8 series) issued under the signature of the Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi whereby the petitioners’ respective representations dated 27.6.2023 (contained in Annexure-7 series) stood rejected. (c) Quashing/setting aside, with all consequences, the notification contained in memo no.1421(S) dated 22.3.2023 (Annexure-4) issued under the signature of the Deputy Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand to the extent it excludes the name of the petitioners as promotees. 3. The brief facts of the case are that initially Jharkhand Public Service Commission ("JPSC" in short) conducted Combined Junior Engineer Recruitment Examination, 2012 in which the petitioners stood successful. Thereafter, JPSC recommended the petitioners for appointment on the post of Junior Engineer (Civil). In terms of the recommendation of JPSC, the Engineer-in- Chief, Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi issued respective office orders appointing the petitioners under the cadre of Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand in the pay-scale of PB-11-Rs.9,300- 34,800/- with grade pay of Rs.4,200/-. In terms of the aforesaid orders the petitioners submitted their joining at the respective places.Thereafter, the Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi through its Under Secretary issued an order publishing a consolidated seniority list of Junior Engineers, which is contained in memo no.5506(S) dated 13.11.2019, which was provisional. Thereafter, a final seniority list was published vide order dated 23.02.2021.Subsequently, the JPSC convened a Departmental Promotion Committee (‘DPC’ in short) meeting on 14.03.2023; wherein a recommendation was made for promotion of Junior Engineers to the post of Assistant Engineer. Thereafter, a final seniority list was published vide order dated 23.02.2021.Subsequently, the JPSC convened a Departmental Promotion Committee (‘DPC’ in short) meeting on 14.03.2023; wherein a recommendation was made for promotion of Junior Engineers to the post of Assistant Engineer. In terms of the said recommendation the Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand issued a notification contained in memo no.1422(S) dated 22.03.2023, which has been issued under the signature of the Deputy Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand; whereby list of Junior engineers were promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) at the pay-scale of PB-II, Rs.9,300-34,800/- with Grade Pay of Rs.5,400/- (revised pay-scale Pay-Matrix Level-9). In the said notification dated 22.03.2023, the juniors have been promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil). 4. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner made written representation dated 05.04.2023 to the Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, but in vain. Subsequently the petitioners moved this Court in W.P.(S) No.2332 of 2023 raising their grievance and this court has disposed of the aforesaid writ petition with a liberty to the petitioners to make a fresh representation and the respondents were directed to consider by speaking and reasoned order taking into consideration the fact that several juniors to the petitioners have been promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer which according to the petitioners have deprived them of being promoted to the said post.Subsequently each of the writ petitioners made a fresh representation on 27.06.2023 and on 18.09.2023 representations of the petitioners stood disposed of by respective purported reasoned order issued under the signature of the Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi; whereby their respective representations stood rejected. Hence this writ application has been filed. 5. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he is not pressing for prayer no. 1(C) and he further submits that the petitioners, who are appointees of 2013 and who have attained service experience of about 10 years on the post of Junior Engineer, are eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer with Grade Pay of Rs.5,400/.The JPSC convened a DPC meeting on 14.03.2023 wherein a recommendation was made for promotion of Junior Engineers to the post of Assistant Engineer. In terms of the said recommendation the Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand issued a notification contained in memo no.1422(S) dated 22.03.2023; whereby list of Junior engineers were promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) at the pay-scale of PB-II, Rs.9,300-34,800/- with Grade Pay of Rs.5,400/- (revised pay-scale Pay-Matrix Level-9). From perusal of the said list, junior to the petitioners have been promoted however, the petitioners have been discriminated.He further submits that while passing the reasoned order, the concerned Respondent has completely ignored the fact of juniors being promoted against the mandatory direction of this Hon’ble court in W.P.(S) no.2332 of 2023 and the decision making process regarding consideration for promotion has been undertaken in gross violation of the principles of natural justice besides being illegal, arbitrary and being in gross violation of their fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India. 6. He contended that the petitioners were never put to clear notice of any such requirement for furnishing the details with regard to properties, service history, character report, etc. nor were they ever informed by their respective senior officers about such communication made vide letter no.3147 (s) dated 29.08.2022. However, any letter of the department cannot supersede the law laid by the Hon’ble Court, inasmuch as, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K.V. Janki Raman, 1991 (4) SCC 109 has held that even in case of departmental or judicial proceeding an employee cannot be deprived from the fundamental right of consideration for promotion and the State has to consider the same in the DPC which can be kept in seal cover till the conclusion of departmental or judicial proceedings. The action of the respondents of not considering individual petitioners for promotion on one hand while promoting the juniors on other hand is in violation of their fundamental and the constitutional right. 7. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that reasoned orders have already been passed while rejecting the petitioners’ representations, wherein it has been stated that they did not submit their service history and also, they did not submit their respective details with regard to their properties (Asset declaration) and character report in spite of various reminders. Thus, for want of the aforesaid details, they were declared disqualified from consideration for promotion; as such, no relief should be granted to petitioners. 8. Thus, for want of the aforesaid details, they were declared disqualified from consideration for promotion; as such, no relief should be granted to petitioners. 8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the document annexed with the respective affidavit it appears that as per the recommendation of the D.P.C. meeting, the notification as contained in memo no.1422(S) dated 22.3.2023 has been issued; which was the list of Junior engineers promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) in which several juniors to the petitioners have been promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer.It further transpires from the respective impugned reasoned orders while rejecting the petitioners’ representations, it has been stated that they did not submit their service history in the Department due to which vigilance clearance remained un-received from the Cabinet Secretariat and Vigilance Department (Vigilance), Government of Jharkhand. It is further stated that the petitioners also did not submit their respective details with regard to their properties (Asset declaration) and character report. Thus, for want of the aforesaid details, they were declared disqualified from consideration for promotion.Respondent have relied upon newspaper publication dated 07.10.2020 as well as newspaper publication dated 24.12.2020; whereby the junior engineers were directed to submit their complete service history and property returns in prescribed format in the department.Whether the respondents were justified by treating the paper publication as valid notice to the petitioners or not is one of the questions to be decided by this Court. 9. In this regard it would be profitable here to refer to Order V rule 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure: “20. Substituted service .—(1) Where the Court is satisfied that there is reason to believe that the defendant is keeping out of the way for the purpose of avoiding service, or that for any other reason the summons cannot be served in the ordinary way, the Court shall order the summons to be served by affixing a copy thereof in some conspicuous place in the Court House, and also upon some conspicuous part of the house (if any) in which the defendant is known to have last resided or carried on business or personally worked for gain, or in such other manner as the Court thinks fit. [(1-A) Where the Court acting under sub-rule (1) orders service by an advertisement in a newspaper, the newspaper shall be a daily newspaper circulating in the locality in which the defendant is last known to have actually and voluntarily resided, carried on business or personally worked for gain.]…………” From bare perusal of the aforesaid rule, it is clear when the summons cannot be served in the ordinary way, then the advertisement in newspaper can be given. In the instant case, instead of directly communicating with the petitioners, respondents have given notice through the newspaper. It is unexpected and not humanly possible that the employees would keep looking at the notice column for there being any notice from their department, that too when the employees are working in the organization and drawing regular salary and other service benefit; as such, this Court finds that respondents were not justified by giving communication to the petitioners through the newspaper. 10. Learned counsel for the respondents have further relied upon the letter dated 29.08.2022 issued by the Joint Secretary to departmental head to inform all the junior engineers to update their service history and property statement which has been specifically denied by the petitioners in para 20 of the writ application that the petitioners were never put to clear notice of any such requirement for furnishing the details with regard to properties, service history, character report, etc. nor were they ever informed by their respective senior officers about any such communication.This categorical statement made in Para-20 of the writ application has not been denied by the respondent in their counter affidavit; as such it cannot be said that the petitioners were duly communicated regarding submission of required document. 11. It further appears from the para 8 of the Writ application whereby it has been specifically contended that the petitioners in view of the anticipated exercise of promotion, duly submitted their respective service book, the details of movable and immovable properties in the prescribed proforma, character certificates and other required documents to the competent authority of the Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand which has not been specifically controverted by the respondent in their counter affidavit. It shows that petitioners have duly submitted the required documents to the department. 12. It shows that petitioners have duly submitted the required documents to the department. 12. Further, Para-10 of the writ application gives the details of juniors, who have been promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) having the seniority position. The same is reproduced hereinunder:- S. No. Name of the petitioners Petitioner’s position as per the seniority list Junior position as per the seniority list, who are promoted 1. Bikram Mandal 1150 1289, 1292, 1297, 1299, 1300 2. Anil Kumar Soren 1250 3. Kishore Kumar Murmu 1266 4. Binkos Khess 1281 5. Sushil Kumar Minz 1287 6. Dhanay Jetha Kumar Horro 1288 From bare perusal of seniority list, it appears that petitioners were much senior than who were already promoted and their cases were not considered only for non-submission of required document; however after perusal of para 8 of the writ application as well as respective representations (Annexure 7 series) filed pursuant to the aforesaid writ they have already filed the same to the department as such the ground of non- submission of required document taken by the respondent to deny the promotion is not acceptable to this court. 13 Having regard to the aforesaid discussions, the reasoned orders dated 18.09.2023 (as contained in Annexure-8 series) issued under the signature of the Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, are hereby, quashed and set aside.Accordingly, the respondents are directed to grant promotion to the petitioners to the promotional post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) with Pay-scale PB-II, Rs.9,300- 34,800/-, Grade Pay of Rs.5,400/- (revised pay-scale Pay Matrix Level 9) under Jharkhand Engineering Services Category 2, since the date when similarly situated or juniors were granted promotion to the said post, with all consequential benefits, including monetary benefits.It is made clear that the formal order to this effect shall be issued as early as possible, but not beyond the period of ten weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order. 14. As a result, the instant writ application is allowed in the manner indicated hereinabove. Pending I.A., if any, is also closed. However, there is no order as to cost.