MANOJ KUMAR Vs. COAL INDIA LIMITED & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present writ petition for quashing of the promotion from E-7 grade to E-8 grade. Initially after considering the submission of the learned advocate for the petitioner, this Court, being prima facie satisfied, directed the respondent authority to keep one post vacant. This Court also directed the parties to exchange their affidavits. Accordingly the General Manager (Personnel), Coal India Limited has filled up 23 posts by giving promotion from the list of eligible candidates thereby keeping one post vacant.

(2.) Mr. Srijib Chakraborty, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that though the list of eligible candidates was prepared for promotion from E-7 grade to E-8 grade on 5th September, 2016 but for 24 vacant posts as per rule 24x5= 120, the list of eligible candidates was prepared. Mr. Chakraborty further submits that though the petitioner's name was appearing in the said list at serial no. 131 but only upto 120 candidates having experience were considered. Mr. Chakraborty further submits that it is evident from record that out of 120 candidates, only 87 candidates appeared before the Departmental Promotion Committee (for short 'DPC') for Civil & Systems Disciplines. As 31 candidates retired and two persons already died. Mr. Chakraborty also submits that the petitioner along with other whose names are appearing after 120 serial number up to 133, they are very much eligible to be considered for promotion from E-7 grade to E-8 grade. Unfortunately the petitioner's name was not considered. Therefore, the petitioner without finding any alternative approached before this Hon'ble Court thereby filing the present writ petition. Mr. Chakraborty further submits that the promotion policy of the executives of CIL which appears at page 24 of the affidavit-in-opposition used by the authority speaks that against each post, at least five candidates should be considered. Therefore, since from the post of E-7 grade to E-8 grade for Civil & Systems Disciplines against 24 vacant post of E-8 grade, at least 120 persons from the E-7 grade should be considered for promotion as it is the policy of the authority that against one post, the names of five candidates should be considered. Unfortunately, it is evident from the records that against 24 posts, actually 87 persons appeared. Mr. Chakraborty further submits that it is the duty of the authority to send 33 persons' names who are immediately after 120 persons in the list of E-7 grade to maintain promotion policy. Unfortunately that has not been followed by the authority. Mr. Chakraborty further contends that this Court initially after being prima facie satisfied directed the respondent authority to keep one post vacant. He further submits that Court should direct the respondent authority to offer promotion to the petitioner against that vacant post. Mr. Chakraborty also contends that it is admitted from the memo dated 6th September, 2017 that DPC pertains to Electrical and Mechanical, Civil and Systems Disciplines was not held till 6th September, 2017.

(3.) In support of his contention, Mr. Chakraborty draws my attention to the letter dated 6th September, 2017 appears at page 24 of the affidavit-inopposition. The relevant portion of the letter dated 6th September, 2017 is quoted below: -