JUDGMENT : Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J. The instant petition has been filed for grant of the following substantive relief: “That the applicant be ordered to be promoted to the post of Suptd. Grade II w.e.f. 1-11-2017 by quashing the order dated 30-01-2018 passed by respondent No.1 being illegal and arbitrary.” 2. The facts are not in dispute. One slot (not post) of Superintendent Grade II (Ex Cadre) became available on 01.11.2017 for being filled up after the retirement of one Shri Gorkh Ram. The petitioner being senior most was eligible for being considered for placement/re-designation/appointment to the said post. He retired from the respondent-University on 30.11.2017 on attaining the age of superannuation. Thereafter, he filed his representation dated 30.12.2017 for his placement to the post in question i.e. Superintendent Grade II (Ex Cadre) against the above slot which fell vacant on 01.11.2017. 3. The claim of the petitioner is opposed by the respondent- University, firstly, on the ground that as per the Rules/ Regulations, no placements/promotions can be made after the retirement against any slot/post when the petitioner had not made any representation for his placement to the post in question while in service before the competent authority. 4. Secondly, the Chief Electoral Officer, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla, vide his letter No.3-29/2017-ELN-3705 dated 12.10.2017 (Annexure R-II) intimated the election schedule for Vidhan Sabha Elections-2017 to the Himachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly on 12.10.2017 and with this announcement, the provisions of the Model Code of Conduct had come into force in the entire State of Himachal Pradesh with immediate effect and would remain in force till the completion of election process. This letter further stipulated that the provisions of the Model Code of Conduct be strictly complied with along with other standing directions, orders of the Election Commission of India circulated to all from time to time. 5. That apart, previously, the orders/instructions regarding election, Model Code of Conduct were issued by the Chief Electoral Officer, Himachal Pradesh vide his letter dated 09.03.2017 and earlier to that instructions were issued by the Election Commission of India on 07.01.2007, the relevant portion whereof reads as under: “No appointments or promotions in Government/Public Undertakings shall be made during this period, without prior clearance of the Commission.” 6. It was in view of these instructions that no appointments/promotions/placements etc. It was in view of these instructions that no appointments/promotions/placements etc. were made in the University during the period of Model Code of Conduct nor any decision to refer such cases to the Election Department of Himachal Pradesh through Administrative Department was taken in the University. 7. We really fail to understand how the stand taken by the respondent-University can be said to be tenable and that is why we had requested the Registrar of the University to explain as to how and in what manner the Model Code of Conduct would in any manner affect the appointments and promotions made by the University during the currency of the Model Code of Conduct. 8. After-all, what was prescribed is only a prior clearance of the Commission. The mere fact that the petitioner did not approach the respondent-University along with his representation at the time of slot falling vacant is of no avail. Moreover, it is not something which the petitioner is seeking with “begging bowl” but he is rather seeking his legitimate claim against the legitimate expectation. 9. We really wonder why the respondent-University would insist upon the petitioner approaching it seeking his legitimate claim of promotion. Whereas, it was the legal and institutional duty of the respondent- University to have made provisions well in advance for filling up the post in question. 10. We are at pains to note that this Court is flooded with litigation where promotions/appointments etc. have been denied solely on the ground of imposition of Model Code of Conduct. The imposition of Model Code of Conduct can aptly be described as a “un-official pen down strike” in the Government/Public Undertakings and all businesses including routine business are held up on account of misinterpretation and misconstruction of the provisions of the document described as Model Code of Conduct. It is high time that the State Government takes a call on this issue. 11. In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court has no hesitation to conclude that the respondent-University has illegally denied placement to the petitioner to the post of Superintendent Grade-II (Ex Cadre), more particularly, when the same does not involve any financial implications and, that too, on complete misinterpretation and lack of understanding of the document commonly known as Model Code of Conduct. Moreover, the respondent-University could not have relied upon this document as a pretense to deny the petitioner his legitimate claim. 12. Moreover, the respondent-University could not have relied upon this document as a pretense to deny the petitioner his legitimate claim. 12. Accordingly, we have no option but to allow this petition and the the order dated 30.01.2018 passed by the respondent-University is ordered to be quashed and set aside. Consequently, the respondent-University is directed to promote the petitioner to the post of Superintendent Grade-II (Ex Cadre) with effect from 01.11.2017. 13. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Chief Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh to issue clear instructions regarding the purpose and object of issuing Model Code of Conduct and further to clarify how this document i.e. Model Code of Conduct does not impede the routine working of the Government/Public Undertakings/Boards/Corporations etc. and further to issue clear instructions that the Model Code of Conduct cannot be used as a pretense by the government servants for indulging in any “un-official pen down strike” during the currency of the Model Code of Conduct within a period of one week. 14. For compliance, to come up on 06.05.2024. 15. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.