Tapan Sen, J. - (1.) HEARD Mr. Saurav Arun, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mrs. Ritu Kumar, learned counsel for the Respondents.
(2.) IN this Writ Application, the Petitioner has prayed for quashing the communication dated 20.3.1996 as contained at Annexure -6 by which the Petitioner has been informed that since he could not secure the qualifying marks in the D.P.C. held on 26.10.1995 for purposes of promotion from the M -1 to M -2 Grade, the D.P.C., therefore, had not recommended his case for promotion. The Petitioner farther prays that a writ of mandamus be issued commanding upon the Respondents to promote the Petitioner from M -l to M -2 Grade on the ground that juniors have been given promotion without considering his case. The Petitioner further submits that under the provisions of Rule 4.7(c) of the Common Coal Cadre, he was entitled to promotion, having completed three continuous years of service in the M -1 Grade. In the counter affidavit filed by the Respondents, it has been stated, inter alia, that as a matter of fact the Petitioner along with other eligible candidates, were considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee (Board -II). The said committee had adopted three yardsticks for purposes of considering the cases for promotion. These three yardsticks were : (i) officers securing 85 to 100 marks would be placed in Category 'A'. (ii) officers securing 75 to 84 marks would be placed in Category 'B'. (iii) officers securing less than 75 marks would be placed in Category 'C'.
(3.) THEY have further stated that the committee had also taken a decision that they would not be recommending cases of any candidate falling in the 3rd category referred to above i.e. those who had secured less than 75 marks.;