Subrata Talukdar, J. - (1.) Under challenge in this appeal is the order dated 12th February, 2015 in W.P. No.15344 (W) of 2014 by which the claim of the Appellant/Writ Petitioner for promotion as Lower Division Clerk (for short LDC) from his existing Grade of Darwan Grade-I was refused.
(2.) The learned Trial Court took the view that the Respondent/Higher Secondary Council (for short the Council) was entitled to adopt a reasonable distinction between Darwans and Peons at the entry level Group-'D' Grade prior to considering their claims to promotion to the LDC Group-'C' Grade. Therefore, without availing of the benefit of affidavits or, considering the record, the writ petition was dismissed on the ground that the promotional exercise was neither arbitrary nor otherwise unfair.
(3.) Appearing in the support of the appeal, Mr. Supriyo Chattopadhyay, Learned Counsel for the Appellant/Writ Petitioner makes a prima facie attractive argument based on the promotional policy of the Council as reflected in its 1993 Regulations. Referring to the Note under Rule 9 of the 1993 Regulations, it is argued that 20% of the L. D. Assistants vacancies in Grade-'C' shall be filled up by promotion from Group-'D' employees who have passed the Madhyamik or its equivalent examination. The Council will only consider as eligible a Group-'D' employee who has completed a minimum of three years confirmed service in his feeder grade.;