M.M. Kumar, J. - (1.) THE short issue raised in the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution is "whether an employee could be denied promotion to a higher post despite fulfilling the stipulated benchmark of 'Good' record devised under the statutory criteria of 'merit -cum -seniority' in preference to those employees who have superior record of 'Very -Good', 'Excellent' or 'Outstanding' -
(2.) THE issue has been raised by the unsuccessful Petitioner who has challenged the order dated 07.09.2007 rendered by the Chandigarh Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (for brevity, 'the Tribunal'), upholding the action of the Respondent whereby he has been denied promotion on the post of Administrative Officer Grade I and II by giving promotion to his junior on the plea of better service record of 'Very Good' or 'Excellent'.
(3.) THE case has chequered history, therefore, it would first be necessary to state few background facts. The Petitioner joined Military Engineering Service as Civilian Store Keeper on 23.12.1959, reclassified as LDC w.e.f. 15.03.1961 and further promoted as UDC w.e.f. 01.12.1969. Under the Rules applicable to service, a UDC is entitled to be considered for promotion in hierarchy of posts in separate higher cadre one after the other. Various channels of promotion are as follows: (a) Officer Superintendent Grade -II, (b) Office Superintendent Grade -I, (c) Administrative Officer Grade -II, (d) Administrative Officer Grade -I, (e) Senior Administrative Officer. It is not disputed that the Petitioner was promoted as Officer Superintendent Grade -II (Selection Post) on 21.04.1981 and further promoted as Office Superintendent Grade -I (Non Selection Post) on 18.04.1984. The Petitioner still earned further promotion as Administrative Officer Grade II (Selection Post) and then as a Administrative Officer Grade -I (Selection Post) on 30.12.1995. The aforesaid promotions were result of recommendation made by the Departmental Promotion Committee (for brevity 'DPC') and review DPC. After the review DPC, the Petitioner was given notional seniority as Office Superintendent Grade -II w.e.f. 11.12.1975. Accordingly, in All India Seniority List of Office Superintendent Grade -II circulated in October 1996 (A -4), he was shown senior to private Respondents.;