Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
S.D. Shukla & Ors vs Coal India Ltd. & Ors on 20 July, 2011
Author: Debasish Kar Gupta
Bench: Debasish Kar Gupta
1
20.7.2011
W.P. 11710(W) of 2011
S.D. Shukla & Ors.
Versus
Coal India Ltd. & Ors.
Mr. Malay Basu,
Mr. Biswaroop Bhattacharya,
Ms. Ashmita Ghosh,
Ms. Reshmi Ghosh
... For the Petitioners.
Mr. Shakti Nath Mukherjee
... For the Respondents.
Affidavit‐of‐service filed today by the petitioners be kept on record.
This writ application is directed against the promotional policy introduced by the respondent authority under office Order dated May 3/5, 2011 for promotion of the Executives from E‐6 to E‐7 grade. By virtue of the impugned Office Order, 3 marks are earmarked for diploma holder candidates belonging to the feeder post while 9 marks are provided for the degree holders. Previous, there was no difference of marks in between the diploma holder and the degree holder candidates.
It is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that the change of promotional policy by 2 virtue of the Office Order under reference is arbitrary. According to him, the eligible candidates belonging to both the categories require certificate of competency, therefore, no discrimination can be made in between the degree holders and the diploma holders.
On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents that to encourage the eligible candidates to obtain better qualifications to serve the organisation more efficiently, the promotional policy has been changed by the respondent authority.
Let affidavit‐in‐opposition be filed within four weeks, reply, if any thereto be filed one week thereafter.
Let this matter appear before appropriate Bench after six weeks.
Upon prima facie consideration of the facts and circumstances of this case, I find that in the event the respondent authority is restrained from giving promotion to any eligible candidates on the basis of the impugned Office Order, there is a possibility of continuation of vacancy of E‐7 grade posts till the disposal of the writ application. On the other hand, the interests of the petitioners can be protected by an 3 appropriate order in case of giving promotions to others during the pendency of this writ application.
In view of the above, liberty is given to the respondents to act upon the impugned Office Order during the pendency of the writ application, if the occasion so arises. But in that event promotions shall be given to others without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the petitioners in this writ application.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be given to the parties, if applied for, subject to compliance with all necessary formalities.
(Debasish Kar Gupta, J.)