were promoted, the petitioner was placed in serial No.135 therein, and Sri.T.J.Rajesh is placed in serial No.67 therein and it is contended that the petitioner ought to have been placed at serial No.66A, just above the abovesaid Sri.T.J.Rajesh, etc. That later objections to Ext.P-2 were considered by the 2nd respondent Chief Engineer, which led to Ext.P-5 proceedings dated 28.8.2009. But that even in Ext.P-5 the petitioner's grievance regarding the denial of seniority in the category of Senior Assistant was not fully redressed and that this is so, since instead of placing him at Serial No.766(A) above Sri.T.J.Rajesh, he was placed only at serial No.789(A) and consequently the revised gradation of Senior Superintendents also did not reflect the due seniority of the petitioner since he was placed only as serial No.85A and that his position ought to have been serial No.66A, it is urged. That due to this denial of due seniority, the petitioner was not promoted even by Ext.P-8 dated 16.6.2010, whereas several of his juniors, including Sri.T.J.Rajesh were promoted, it is averred. That during the pendency of the Writ Petition, which impugned Exts.P-2, P-4, P-5, P-6 and P-8, the 2nd respondent had passed orders accepting the seniority of the petitioner above Sri.T.J.Rajesh, as also ordering notional promotion to the petitioner in the category of Senior Assistant from the date on
