' FAZAL KARIM, J.---The petitioner was appointed as L.D.C. In Grade-5 on 9-5-1963. On 16-7-1965 he was appointed as Key Punch Operator; he was in Grade-6 when on 15-3-1974 he was offered promotion in Grade-7. However, he preferred to continue as Key Punch Operator in Grade-6 and on his request his promotion was deferred. Then, on his (own request he was promoted on 23-10-1979 as U.D.C.
2. The grievance made by him before the Tribunal was that he had done F.A. In 1967; that by virtue of a letter of the year 1970, his juniors were promoted as U.D.C. And were later promoted as Assistant and that he should like his juniors, also be granted promotion as U.D.C. And then as Assistant from the back date. Before the Tribunal it was conceded that he had not applied for his promotion till 1979 and that as soon as he did so apply, he was granted promotion. It was said that he had not applied for promotion because he was unaware of the promotion policy. The Tribunal repelled that explanation; it appeared to the Tribunal that "he was not willing to serve outside his cadre of Key Punch Operator perhaps due to some other benefits".
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner maintains that the petitioner could not be deprived of his right of promotion because he had, at one stage, requested for his promotion to be deferred. The real point is that he had not applied for promotion till 1979 and when he did he was given promotion.
Obviously promotion could not be thrust upon him. If the instructions contained in the letter of the year 1970 availed him, then he was entitled to Promotion in 1974, when promotion was actually offered to him. It was he who did not avail of his right to promotion. No question of giving him retrospective promotion, therefore, arises.