- (1.) This writ challenges a promotional order dated 18th October 2006. The Writ petitioner 's grievance is confined to the fact that in the list of promotees from E3 grade of the Respondent No. 1 to its E4 grade, he ought to have been included. He does not claim that any promotion should be cancelled. His case is founded on a recommendation of a committee of the respondent No.1 dated 22nd September,2000 regarding inter alia promotion of the officers who have passed or will pass the Mine manager 's examination with first class while working in the 2nd Class channel in E2, E3, E4 and E5 grade. The substance of the recommendation is inter alia that those working in "2nd Class stream in the E3 grade of the respondent No.1 who have obtained a first Class Mines Manager Certificate of Competency (MMCC) would be promoted to the E4 grade." On this basis, admittedly, all the persons mentioned in the order dated 18th October, 2006 were promoted to the post of E4 grade in "1st Class channel". In all respects, admittedly, the writ petitioner was similarly placed as those persons. But an office memorandum dated 12th June 2006 intervened, which stated the following: "The executives who pass 1st class MMCC in E3, E4 & E5 grade will be horizontally placed in the same grade in 1st class channel from the effective date of 1st class. The above recommendation shall come into force with effect from 08.05.2006. Accordingly, the old cases shall be disposed as per existing norms and guidelines and new pass out cases shall be dealt as per recommendation mentioned above."
(2.) It is said by the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 that since the writ petitioner obtained the above qualifications after coming into force of this office memorandum on 8th May, 2006 that is, in or about August 2006 his case was not considered. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has relied on a Single Bench unreported decision of our Court in the case of (Sanjay Perveen Vs. Coal India Limited and others) decided on 26th September, 2008. In that decision also the petitioner was similarly placed as the writ petitioner here. After detailed reasons our Court said : " The respondent authorities are hereby directed not to give effect to the Memorandum dated 12th June, 2006 being Annexure 'P-5 ' to the writ application so far the claim of the present petitioners are concerned. The said authorities are directed to promote the petitioners to E-4 grade from E-3 grade in the First Class Channel with effect from the date mentioned in their First Class Certificate by treating them at par with 2003, 2004 & 2005 batches forthwith."
(3.) An appeal was preferred from that decision being MAT 1005 of 2008 where the appeal was admitted but stay refused.;