AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The appellant is in appeal against the order dated 04.09.2003, whereby the writ petition preferred by the writ petitioner-appellant has been dismissed.
We have heard learned Counsel for the parties.
The main submission of the appellant has been that for the year 1995-96, he was given grading as ''Average'', which is arbitrary as for the year 1994-95, he was given as ''Good''. Even if the appellant''s argument is accepted and the grading for the year 199596 is treated to be as ''Good'', even then he will be having, in the five years, 3 ''Good'' and 2 ''Very Good'' entries to his credit.
In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it is pointed out that the bench mark grading prescribed by the Government as per Para 6.3.1 of D.P.C. Rules for promotion of Officers belong to General Category was ''Good''. It is further set out that as per said paragraph, for promotion to the rank of Assistant Commandant, the officers graded as ''Outstanding'' will rank en bloc senior to those who were graded as ''Very Good'' and the officers graded as ''Very Good'' will rank en bloc senior to those who were graded as ''Good''. They will be placed in the select panel according to the number of vacancies. The Officers with same grading will maintain their inter se seniority in the feeder post.
Out of 192 General category officers brought on panel by the DPC, 172 were categorized as ''Very Good'' and 20 were ''Good'', who were senior than the appellant. The appellant was graded as ''Good'' and was placed at Serial No. 45 of ''Good''. Therefore, he could not be brought on panel for want of vacancies and in fact, none of his juniors with ''Good'' grading were promoted.
From the above, it is clear that the appellant''s grading was ''Good'' and out of 192, who were promoted, 172 were graded as ''Very Good'' and 20 were graded as ''Good'' and all were senior to the appellant. In other words, all 192, were more meritorious than the appellant.
Once that be the case, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge. Hence the appeal is dismissed.