Jharkhand High Court
J.K. Yadav Son Of Late Guru Charan Gope vs Coal India Ltd. At 10 Netajee Subhas Road ... on 12 August, 2025
Author: Sanjay Prasad
Bench: Sanjay Prasad
2025:JHHC:23612
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (L) No. 3370 of 2003
....
J.K. Yadav son of late Guru Charan Gope, resident of near Delhi
Public School, Karmic Nagar, P.S.-Saraidhela, District-Dhanbad
......Petitioner
Versus
1. Coal India Ltd. At 10 Netajee Subhas Road Calcutta - 700001
2. Chairman, Coal India Ltd., at 10, Netajee Subhas Road, Calcutta-
700001 (W.B.)
3. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., Koyla Bhawan, Koyla Nagar, Dhanbad
(Jharkhand)
4. General Manager (Personal) Coal India Ltd., B.C.C.L. Dhanbad,
5. Chairman-cum-Managing Director Bharat Coming Coal Ltd.,
Koyla Bhawn, Koyla Nagar, Dhanbad
......Respondents
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD
-----
For the Petitioner : Md. Mokhtar Khan, Advocate
Md. Farhan Kibriya, Advocate
For the Respondent : Mr. Anoop Kr. Mehta, Advocate
Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate
......
CAV Pronounced on 12.08.2025
That this writ application has been filed on behalf of the
petitioner for following reliefs:-
(i) To quash the order as contained in Ref No.CIL/C-5A (CC)
C.M-80/J.K.Y/ 36 dated 04.07.2003 passed by General Manager
(Personal) Coal India Ltd. whereby by the petitioner has been
refused his promotion as per the scheme of E & M discipline as in
corporate in common coal cadre, an executive has to have the
professional qualification of recognized Engineering diploma of
three years duration in the relevant branch of Engineering before
the eligible for promotion from E-2 to E-5 grade. It is said that the
petitioner was the not having the prescribed cadre qualification his
case of promotion from E-1 to E-2 grade was not considered as the
2025:JHHC:23612
petitioner was having one year advance diploma acquired from
I.S.M Dhanbad. AS such the petitioner was not considered for
promotion from E-1 to E-2 grade alongwith other juniors who
were promoted. The petitioner has been given promotion to the
post of Engineer (E&M) in E-2 grade in the scale of pay of
Rs.10750/- -300-16750 from the date he assumes charge when the
petitioner is entitled to be promoted in E-2 grade w.e.f. 01.05.1988
and E-3 grade w.e.f. 01.05.1991 and E-4 w.e.f. 01.05.1994 & E-5
grade w.e.f 01.05.1997 / 30.08.2001. Because his juniors having
given promotion in the aforesaid grade from the aforesaid date.
And "For quashing of order dated 26.06.2003 which was
communicated to the petitioner vide its letter dated 04.07.2003
whereby the respondents have denied the promotion to the
petitioner."
(ii) To modify the order contained in Ref. No.C.I.L/C-54
(CC) form E-1,E-2/E&M/J.K.Y/062/335 dated 30.11.2000 passed
by the Chief General Manager (Personal) Coal India Ltd. BCCL
Dhanbad whereby the petitioner has been given promotion to the
post of Engineer (E&M) in E-2 grade in the scale of pay of
Rs.10750/-300-16750.
(iii) To treat the advanced diploma in mine instrumentation
and telecommunication (duration of 1 year, awarded by Indian
School of Mines, Dhanbad is higher than normal three years
diploma awarded by other institutions and taking into
consideration.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
counsel for the Respondents.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner has moved earlier before this court to modify the order
2025:JHHC:23612
as contained in reference dated 31.11.2000 by filing W.P.(S)
No.569 of 2001 which was allowed on 11.02.2003 by the Co-
ordinate Bench (Justice Vikramaditya Prasad as then his Lordship
was) by deciding the issue in favour of the petitioner and High
Court had directed that the Respondents shall decide the seniority
of Engineers in E-2 Grade and also consider the seniority of the
petitioner again and shall pass the reasoned order as to why his
seniority will not computed from the date when his juniors were
promoted.
It is submitted that the petitioner was appointed as
Technical Supervisor Grade 'A' on 01.09.1976 in Bharat Coking
Coal Ltd. The petitioner had worked as Technical Supervisor
Grade A and was sent for obtaining Diploma in Mining Electronics
and Tele Communication from Indian School of Mines Dhanbad
by C.C.L in 1985 and he obtained advanced Diploma in Mining
Electronic and Tele Communication from I.S.M Dhanbad in the
year 1986.
Thereafter, the petitioner after getting diploma in mine
Electronics and Telecommunication from India School of Mines,
Dhanbad was promoted in E-1 grade on 01.05.1988.
It is submitted that Mr. N.P. Singh, Jagat Narayan,
Mahabir Sharma, S. Banerjee were non Diploma holders and
juniors to the petitioenrs have been promoted to Grade E-2 in 1992
under E & M discipline. Sukhdeo Narayan Superintending
Engineeer (E&T) and J.P.N Sahu Senior Executive Engineer
(E&T) were not having three years diploma in
Electronics/Instrumentation/Telecommunication but they were
having one year Advanced Diploma in Mining and Electronics
from Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad and they were promoted
2025:JHHC:23612
from Technical and Supervisor Grade-A to E-2 Grade and E-2 and
E-3 grade, E-4 and E-5 and both were also juniors to the petitioner.
4. It is submitted that the petitioner was entitled to be
promoted in E-2 grade w.e.f 01.05.1988 and since juniors to the
petitioner were given promotion in E-2 grade vide letter
No.BCCL/PA-V/From/Executive (E&M)/ E-2/91/7549-604 dated
22.10.1991 w.e.f 01.05.1988. Therefore, the petitioner filed a
representation before the General Manage (P) Coal India Limited
to grant him promotion in E-2 grade from 01.05.1988 as his Junior
had been given promotion and on his representation the petitioner
was informed that since he held Diploma of one year duration and
therefore, he is not entitled to be promoted in grade as per Cadre
Schema in E&M. Discipline. Minimum qualification for promotion
from Foreman I/C to Engineer E-2 grade is recognized Diploma of
three years duration vide letter No.BCCL/EE/E&M/91-(6)-
5657(A) dated 17.07.1991.
5. It is submitted that the petitioner on receipt of the letter
aforesaid filed representation before General Manager (Personal)
Coal India Ltd, Calcutta on 05.08.1992 submitting therein that
since Advance Diploma in Mine Instrumentation and Tele
Communication granted by India School of Mines is more higher
than three years Diploma course offered by other institution
therefore he is entitled to be promoted in E-2 grade from
01.05.1988 on which date his juniors were given promotion.
6. It is submitted that the facts that the Diploma in Advanced
Diploma in Mine Instrumentation and Tele communication
(Mining Electronics and Telecommunication) offered by Indian
School of Mines, Dhanbad was enquired into by the B.C.C.L vide
Ref No.BCCL EE-34684(A) dtd. 28.10.1989 by which the Deputy
2025:JHHC:23612
Chief Personal Manager, B.C.C.L. wanted to know as to whether
Diploma of Mines Instrumentation and Tele Communication is
equivalent to three years Diploma course or not and in response to
the letter aforesaid the Registrar, Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad
informed the Deputy Chief Personnel Manager, B.C.C.L. vide Ref
No.10812/89 dated 06.11.1989 that the Advance Diploma course
of I.S.M. Dhanbad are of higher level than a normal three years
Diploma programme from any other institutional programme.
It is submitted that the Govt. of India, Ministry of Human
Resources Development Deptt. of Education vide letter
No.F- 16.3.94 TD 5/IS dated 23.12.1994 informed the Principal
I.T.I. Dhanbad that all the degrees Diploma granted by Indian
School of Mines, Dhanbad are recognised by Govt. of India,
Indian and by Association of Indian Universities.
7. It is submitted that the petitioner inspite of the fact that he
possessed the requisites qualification and was having experience
for being promoted in E-2 grade w.e.f. 01.05.1988, but the same
was denied to him therefore he filed several representations right
from 1992 and 1997 to the last representation was filed on
28.5.1997.
In the meantime, the B.C.C.L. circulated the seniority list
of the foreman In-charge (Diploma Holder) and in the said
seniority list the petitioner was no.2 and all the persons in the
seniority list had been given promotion in higher grade except the
petitioner.
8. Thereafter, one Anil Kumar Singh who also held
advanced Diploma in Mine Instrumentation and Tele
Communication and who was also denied promotion in E-2 grade
on the ground that the advanced Diploma in Mines
2025:JHHC:23612
Instrumentation and Tele Communication is not equivalent to the
recognised Diploma of three years duration, moved the Hon'ble
Calcutta High Court in W.P. No. 1679 of 1997 and the Hon'ble
Calcutta High Court. vide order dated 22.8.2000 had directed the
said respondents to consider the case of the said Anil Kumar Singh
for promotion in E-2 grade and in light of the order passed by
Hon'ble Calcutta High Court, the Coal India Limited vide order
dated 10.11.2000 had promoted the said Anil Kumar Singh to the
post of Engineer from E-1 to E-2 grade in the scale of pay of Rs.
10,750-300-16,750 w.e.f. the date he assumes charge.
It is submitted that M/s Coal India Limited vide letter
dated 26.06.2003 (i.e. Annexure-1/1 of Supplementary Affidavit
dated 26.08.2003) has wrongly held that the petitioner is not
entitled for promotion from E-2 to E-3 Grade as he did not possess
the Cadre qualification even after passing of order dated
11.02.2003 passed in WP(S) No.5695/2001.
Hence the impugned order may be set aside and the
petitioner may be held to be entitled to promotion.
9. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondents
submitted that this writ petition is devoid and fit to be dismissed as
no illegality has been done.
10. It is submitted that in the case of Anil Kumar Singh, the
Hon'ble Calcutta High Court passed certain directions upon the
Respondents and the said directions were complied with. In order
to maintain parity, similar treatment has been given to the
petitioner who was also promoted like Sri A.K. Singh, the
petitioner in W.P. No.1679 of 1997 before the Hon'ble Calcutta
High Court.
11. It is submitted that Sri Om Prakash Ram has the
2025:JHHC:23612
educational qualification of Matriculation and diploma from City
Guilds of London Institute. In view of the said qualification being
possessed by him, Sri Om Prakash Ram was given promotion
directly from Non-Executive i.e. Supervisory Grade to E-2 grade
and subsequently to E-3 grade. So far as the petitioner is
concerned, since he did not possess the requisite cadre
qualification, he was promoted from the Non-Executive
Supervisory Grade to E-1 grade. It is further submitted that
diploma in Electrical Engineering from City and Guilds Institute of
London (2 years Course Part I and II) is at par with three years
diploma in Electrical Engineering from recognised Indian
Polytechnic Institute and the same is recognised by the
Government of India as is evident from the letter of the
Government of India dated 29.04.1971, 30.05.1984. It is further
stated that the said recognition has now been withdrawn since 1985
by the Government of India
It is submitted that the petitioner had earlier moved this
High Court by filing a writ petition being W.P.(S) No.5695 of
2001. The said writ application was disposed of by an order dated
11.02.2003 contained in Annexure-1 to the writ petition and this
High Court had directed the Respondents to consider the seniority
of the petitioner afresh and to pass a reasoned order.
In compliance of the aforesaid directions passed by this
High Court, the matter of the petitioner was considered afresh by
M/s. Coal India Limited and by an order dated 26.06.2003, the
General Manager (Personnel), Coal India Limited, i.e. the
Respondent No.4 herein, held that the seniority of the writ
petitioner was fixed properly. It was also held that the petitioner
did not fulfil the cadre qualification and others though junior to the
2025:JHHC:23612
petitioner had fulfilled cadre qualification and possessed
recognized Engineering diploma of three year duration as
prescribed in the Cadre scheme had in fact been promoted from
E-2 to E-3 grade.
It is submitted that from the order dated 26.06.2003, it is
evident that the petitioner possesses qualification of Electrical
Supervisory Certificate with advanced diploma in Mine Instrument
and Tele-communication of Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad
which is one of year duration. However, as per the Cadre scheme
of Electrical and Mechanical (E&M) discipline as incorporated in
the Common Coal Cadre, an Executive has to possess the
professional qualification of recognized Engineering diploma of
three years duration in the relevant Branch of Engineering before
being eligible for promotion from E-2 to E-3 Grade. Hence, the
petitioner's case for promotion from E-1 to E-2 grade was not
considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee (D.P.C.) for
several times.
It is submitted that so far as the case of A. K. Singh,
having identical qualification of the petitioner and working in the
post of Assistant Engineer (E&M) in B.C.C.L. since 1992 together
with the petitioner is concerned, the case of promotion of Sri A. K.
Singh from E-1 to E-2 grade was also not considered and it was
held earlier since he was also not having the cadre qualification
like the petitioner Sri J.K.Yadav.
It is submitted that subsequently Sri A. K. Singh had
filed a writ application before the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court
being W.P.No.1679 of 1997 praying for consideration of his
promotion from E-1 to E-2 grade. Thereafter vide order dated
22.8.2000, the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court passed an order in
2025:JHHC:23612
favour of Sri A. K. Singh who was ultimately promoted from E-1
to E-2 grade, in compliance of the judgment of the Hon'ble
Calcutta High Court vide order of Coal India Limited dated
30.11.2000.
However, subsequently it was decided by the Respondents
that the petitioner may also be considered for promotion from E-1
to E-2 grade alongwith Sri A. K. Singh as their cases were
identical. Accordingly, the writ petitioner was also promoted
from E-1 to E-2 grade to the post of Engineer (E&M) vide CIL's
order No.CIL/C-5A(cc)/Prom.E-1-E2/E&M/JKY/062/335 dated
30/11/2000 as a special case without any precedence.
It is submitted that the Respondents has concluded that the
petitioner is not eligible for promotion to E-3 grade in E&M cadre.
In absence of the qualification prescribed for promotion, the
petitioner has not been promoted because one year advanced
diploma in Mine Instrumentation and Tele-communication
awarded by the Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad cannot be
compared to Three Years Diploma awarded by other Institution.
It is submitted that M/s Coal India Limited vide their
Letter dated 26.06.2003 held that the petitioner is not entitled for
promotion from E-2 to E-3 as he does not possess the cadre
qualification.
So far as the, order dated 11.02.2003 passed in
W.P.(S) No.5695 of 2001 by this High Court is concerned, this
High Court had directed the Respondents to decide the seniority of
Engineers in E-2 grade and pass a reasoned order and hence the
case of the petitioner was considered by the Respondents.
It is submitted that the petitioner does not fulfill the cadre
qualification and does not have the recognized Engineering
2025:JHHC:23612
diploma of three years duration and accordingly no comparison
can be drawn from such eligible candidate possessing three years
diploma from a recognized Institution.
It is submitted that diploma of three years duration is not
equivalent to diploma of one year duration from I.S.M.
It is submitted that any information furnished by the
Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad is not binding upon the
Respondents. The fact remains that the advance diploma of I.S.M.,
Dhanbad is of one year duration and the same cannot be equated
with three-year diploma programme of a recognized Institution.
12. It is submitted that the said Shri Anil Kumar Singh had
again filed a Writ Petition before the Calcutta High Court vide WP
No.266 of 2002 as necessary decision was not taken by the
Competent Authority regarding equivalence of his advance
Diploma from Indian of Mines in Mine Instrumentation and Tele-
Communication vis-à-vis the three year Diploma Course for same
qualification from other recognized institutes as such
determination was required for considering him for promotion to
E-3 Grade.
However, the said Writ Petition No.266/2002 was
disposed of by vide order dated 25.08.2004 by the Hon'ble
Calcutta High Court (i.e. Anenxure-E) granting liberty to the
Petitioner to make detailed representation before the Chairman,
Coal India Limited who was directed to pass a reasoned order
regarding grievances of the Petitioner.
13. Thereafter, the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Coal
India Limited by his order bearing Ref. No.CIL/C-
5A(CC)/CM/AKS/35 dated 17.11.2004 passed an order to the
effect that as per Cadre Scheme of E&M Discipline as
2025:JHHC:23612
incorporated in the Common Coal Cadre an Executive must be
having professional qualification of recognized Engineering
Diploma of three years duration in the relevant branch of
Engineering before being eligible for promotion from E-2 to E-3
Grade. Since the petitioner (i.e. Anil Kumar Singh) was not having
the prescribed cadre qualification, his case of promotion from E-1
to E-2 Grade was no considered by the DPC many a times. He also
noticed the fact that after promotion from E-1 to E-2 Grade Shri
Anil Kumar Singh has not acquired any additional qualification.
The assertion made by Anil Kumar Singh that Advanced Diploma
obtained by him is equivalent to three years Diploma is a mere
statement without any binding force and does not satisfy the
conditions of the Cadre Scheme as also the conditions imposed in
the Promotion Order dated 30.11.2000 for being considered for
promotion to E-3 Grade in E&M Discipline. The Chairman, CIL
also noticed the contention of Shri A.K. Singh regarding promotion
of his juniors and held that protection of his seniority is not
sustainable as the promotions of his juniors were allowed as they
were having requisite qualifications as per Common Coal Cadre.
Thus, representation dated 01.09.2004 (i.e. Annexure-F) was held
to be devoid of any merit.
14. Thereafter, the said Anil Kumar Singh filed WP(S)
No.4729 of 2005 before this Court which was dismissed on
03.01.2006 (i.e. Annexure-G).
15. Thereafter, then Anil Kumar Singh has filed LPA No.58 of
2006 before this Court which was dismissed on 22.06.2006 (i.e.
Annexure-H
Hence, in view of the above, this Writ Petition may be
dismissed.
2025:JHHC:23612
16. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and from
going through the records, it appears that this is the second round
of litigation by which the petitioner has preferred this Writ Petition
before this Court.
17. It further reveals that the case of the petitioner was
rejected time and again earlier by the respondents for grant of
promotion. Thereafter, the petitioner had filed the Writ Petition
before this Court vide WP(S) No.5695 of 2001, which was
disposed of on 11.02.2003 by the Co-ordinate Bench ( Justice
Vikramaditya Prasad as then his Lordship was) on 11.02.2003 with
the observations which are as follows:-
"Therefore, it is directed that the respondents while
deciding seniority of engineers in E-2 cadre will consider
the seniority of the petitioner again and will pass a
reasoned order as to why his seniority will not be
computed from that date when his juniors were promoted
ignoring the case of the petitioner."
18. It transpires that the Co-ordinate Bench (Justice
Vikramaditya Prasad as then his Lordship was) of this Court had
directed the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner in
WP(S) No.5695 of 2001, by the Co-ordinate Bench (Justice
Vikramaditya Prasad as then his Lordship was) of this Court.
However, the CIL authorities vide order dated 26.06.2003 (i.e.
Annexure-1/1 of Supplementary Affidavit dated 26.08.2003) and
which was communicated vide letter dated 04.07.2003 in which
the Respondent No.4 had rejected the case of the petitioner for
grant of promotion.
19. Thus, it is evident that the Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court had directed the Respondents to consider the seniority of the
2025:JHHC:23612
petitioner again and they were directed to pass reasoned order.
Thus, the respondents have passed the reasoned order
dated 26.06.2003 (i.e. Annexure-1/1 to the Supplementary
Affidavit dated 26.08.2003) by which the respondents have denied
the promotion to the petitioner on the ground for not possessing the
requisites qualification.
20. In the meantime, one Writ Petition No.1679 of 1997 was
filed by one A.K. Singh and the said WP(S) was disposed of by the
Hon'ble Calcutta High Court on 22.08.2000 with the observations
as follows:-
"With regard to the first round of objection, after
considering the contention and pursuing the materials
available. I find that though earlier rejection was in 1987
but the petitioner is successful in showing that the matter
was still under consideration as would appear from the
minutes dated 31.03.1998 and, therefore, the delay in such
circumstances, will not be a bar for entertain this writ
petition.
With regard to the second objection regarding
territorial jurisdiction, I find that the sufficiency of
qualification in a matter of policy which is to be decided
by the Coal India Limited. Therefore, in such matter,
when the authority which is to take decision is having its
office within the jurisdiction of this Court, it cannot be
said that the substantial part of cause of action that arisen
outside the territorial jurisdiction, of this Court, and,
therefore, this objection of the respondents can also not be
accepted.
With regard to the third round of preliminary
2025:JHHC:23612
objection even if it not for the writ Court to decide the
question of sufficiency of a qualification for promotion,
but in the present case, it is found that the matter has been
lying pending before the Coal India Limited as the minute
dated 31.03.1998 shows contentions of the petitioner is
also that such matter requires to be decided by the said
appropriate authority and should not be kept pending. On
behalf of the respondents nothing could be shown
justifying the pendency of the matter for any longer
period.
Therefore, in view of findings, the Writ Petition is
allowed and the Coal India Limited and its appropriate
authorities are directed to take a decision on reference
based on Clause - 9 of the minutes dated 31.03.1998 at
Annexure 'X' to the Affidavit-in-Reply within three
months from today.
All parties are to act on a signed copy of the
ordering portion of the dictated order on the usual
undertakings.
21. It is further evident that the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court
vide order dated 22.08.2000 passed in WP No.1679 of 1997 has
observed that it is not the Writ Court to decide the question of
sufficiency of the qualification for promotion and has observed the
matter was pending before the Coal India Limited since
31.07.1998 and as such the Hon'ble High Court had directed the
authorities to decide the matter and it should not be kept pending.
22. Thereafter, no positive relief was grant to the said Anil
Kumar Singh by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court.
23. Thereafter, the Respondents had promoted the said A.K.
2025:JHHC:23612
Singh to the post of Engineer (E&M) in E-2 Grade as special case
without any precedence after observing usual formalities as per
rules vide Annexure-D dated 30.10.2000.
24. The Respondents had also Promoted the petitioner vide
order dated 30.11.2000 as treating his case identical to the case of
said Anil Kumar Singh.
25. It further transpires that in the meantime the said Anil
Kumar Singh had filed another WP(C) 266 of 2002 before the
Hon'ble Calcutta High Court which was disposed of on
25.08.2004(i.e. Annexure-E) with the following observations: -
" The Court:- The grievances of the writ petitioner are two
fold:-
1. Necessary decision was not taken by the competent
authority regarding equivalence of his advanced diploma
form Indian School of Mines in Mine Instrumentation and
Telecommunication, vis-à-vis the three year diploma
course for same qualification from other recognized
institute, though such determination was required for
considering him for promotion to E-3 grade:
2. His promotion to E-2 grade has resulted in a cadre
change, when such change is not permissible in law.
In course of hearing, learned counsel for the parties
have suggested that the above learned counsel for the
parties have referred to the Chairman of Coal India Ltd.
for taking an appropriate decision by him.
I am of the view that the question of equivalence of
qualifications necessary for promotion is to be decided in
the first instance by the employer, and the writ court is not
the appropriate forum for giving a decision on such issue.
2025:JHHC:23612
The question whether petitioner's promotion to E-2 grade
has resulted in his change of cadre, is also to be decided
by the competent authority in the first instance on the
basis of the facts and materials to be placed before him.
Admittedly, the competent authority has not yet taken any
decision on such issue and hence I find no reason to dwell
on it is exercise of extraordinary writ jurisdiction.
For the foregoing reasons the writ petition is
disposed of by the following orders:-
The petitioner would be at liberty to make a detailed
representation for expressing his grievances to the
Chairman, Coal India Ltd. within four weeks from the
date of receipt of such representation, the Chairman shall
give a reasoned decision regarding the grievances of the
petitioner. For giving the decision the Chairman would be
free to take assistance and help from the officials, persons,
experts and also from the petitioner. The decision taken
shall be communicated to the petitioner forthwith.
In facts and circumstances of the case. I am not
inclined to make any order for costs in favour of either of
the parties.
Hence, there will be no order for costs in the writ
petition.
All parties are to act on a singed xerox copy of this
dictated order on the usual undertaking.
26. However, in the meantime, the petitioner had filed the
instant Writ Petition No.3370 of 2003 for granting of promotion
and also for quashing the order dated 26.06.2003 (i.e. Annexure-
1/1 of supplementary Affidavit dated 26.08.2003) and which was
2025:JHHC:23612
communicated to him vide letter no.04.07.2003.
27. It transpires that the above Writ Petition No.3370 of 2003
was admitted on 19.12.2003 by the Co-ordinate Bench (Justice
M.Y. Eqbal as then His Lordship was) of this Court.
28. The Above, Writ Petition was heard time and time on
12.06.2017 by the Co-ordinate Bench (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh
Shankar) of this Court and on 11.01.2019 by the Co-ordinate
Bench (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar) of this Court and on
21.02.2019 and on 21.10.2020 and 17.12.2020 and 05.01.2021
and 15.02.2021 and 23.03.2021 by the Co-ordinate Bench
(Hon'ble Mr. Justice Deepak Roshan) of this Court and dated
14.02.2022 and 21.02.2022 and 14.06.2022 and 30.08.2022 and
12.09.2022 by the Co-ordinate Bench (Hon'ble Mrs. Anubha
Rawat Choudhary) of this Court and on 13.02.2024 by the
Co-ordinate Bench (Justice S.N. Pathak as then his Lordship was)
of this Court.
29. Thereafter, the matter was placed before this Court on
10.06.2024 for the first time and then notice were issued to the
Chairman BCCL (i.e. Respondent No.5) on the request of the
learned counsel for the petitioner vide order dated 10.06.2024,
even on 02.08.2024, learned counsel for the petitioner had taken
time to file Supplementary Affidavit and thereafter the matter was
posted on 06.09.2024 and on the request of the learned counsel for
both the sides the matter was placed on 10.09.2024
30. It appears that on the record that in the meantime the
petitioner has retired in May 2004.
31. It further appears that in the meantime the petitioner Anil
Kumar Singh filed in WPS No.266 of 2002. Thereafter, the
Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Coal India Limited and by his
2025:JHHC:23612
order bearing Ref. No. CIL/C-5A(CC)/CM-37/AKS/35 dated
17.11.2004 passed an order to the effect that as per Cadre Scheme
of E&M Discipline as incorporated in the Common Coal Cadre an
Executive must be having professional qualification of recognized
Engineering Diploma of three years duration in the relevant branch
of engineering before being eligible for promotion from E-2 to E-3
Grade. Since the Petitioner was not having the prescribed cadre
qualification, his case of promotion from E-l to
E-2 Grade was not considered by the DPC many a times. He also
noticed the fact that after promotion from E-l to E-2 Grade Shri
Anil Kumar Singh has not acquired any additional qualification.
The assertion made by Shri Singh that Advanced Diploma obtained
by him is equivalent to three years Diploma is a mere statement
without any binding force and does not satisfy the conditions of the
Cadre Scheme as also the conditions imposed in the Promotion
Order dated 30.11.2000 for being considered for promotion to E-3
Grade in E&M Discipline. The Chairman, CIL also noticed the
contention of Shri A.K. Singh regarding promotion of his juniors
and held that protection of his seniority is not sustainable as the
promotions of his juniors were allowed as they were having
requisite qualifications as per Common Coal Cadre. Thus,
representation dated 01.09.2004 was held to be devoid of any
merit.
32. Thereafter, the Respondents vide order dated 17.11.2004
has rejected the claim of the said A. K. Singh vide order dated
17.11.2004 (i.e. Annexure-F) which has been enclosed in the
Supplementary Counter Affidavit dated 13.08.2024.
33. Thereafter, said Anil Kumar Singh being aggrieved by the
above order dated 17.11.2004 had filed WPS No. 4729 of 2005
2025:JHHC:23612
before this Jharkhand High Court and this High Court by order
dated 03.01.2006 dismissed the Writ Application by the
Co-ordinate Bench (Justice S.J. Mukhopadhyay as then His
Lordship was) by observing as follows:-
"'The submission as made by Learned Counsel for the
Petitioner that the Advanced Diploma in Mining Instrumentation
and Tele-Communication is a qualification higher than the required
cannot be determined in absence of relevant details nor it can be
accepted that one year "Advanced Diploma in Mining
Instrumentation and Tele-Communication" course is equivalent to
other three years Diploma Course. There being no merit, the Writ
Petition is dismissed.'
34. Thereafter, the said Anil Kumar preferred LPA
No.58 of 2006 before this High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi which
was dismissed on 22.06.2006 (i.e. Annexure-H) by the Hon'ble
Division Bench with the observations as follows:
"Para-4:-Admittedly, the appellant, Assistant Engineer
(E&M), BCCL was promoted from non-Executive to
Executive Grade in E-1 prior to centralization of Cadre on
the basis of his qualification i.e. National Apprenticeship
Certificate and Advance Diploma of Indian School of Mines,
Dhanbad. The appellant was not considered for promotion
from E-1 to E-2 Grade in E&M Discipline because he does
not possess recognized diploma of three years' duration as
per the cadre scheme. The appellant moved the Calcutta
High Court by filing writ application being W.P. No.1679 of
1997 praying for his promotion to E-2 Grade on the basis of
said one year Advance Diploma Course in Mining
Instrumentation and Telecommunication. The writ petition
2025:JHHC:23612
was disposed of with a direction to the respondents Coal
India Limited to take decision in the matter of promotion of
the appellant. The Coal India Limited in compliance of the
direction of the Calcutta High Court considered the case of
the petitioner and having regard the acquiring one year
diploma from Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad as
sponsored candidate it was decided to consider the case of
the appellant for promotion to E-2 Grade as an special case
without any precedence after observing usual formalities as
per rules. It was clearly mentioned that further promotion of
the appellant to E-3 Grade and above will be subject to his
acquiring requisites qualification strictly as per Common
Coal Cadre. Admittedly, appellant did not acquire any
additional qualification and even he does not possess
recognized diploma of three years duration as per the cadre
scheme even then he again claimed promotion from E-2 to
E-3 Grade.
Para-5:- In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, learned
Single Judge rightly held that one-year diploma in Mining
Instrumentation and Telecommunication is not equivalent to
three years' diploma course. In our view, appellant cannot
claim his promotion again to the higher post as matter of
right and only on the basis of one year Advance Diploma in
Mining Instrumentation and Telecommunication. The
appellant has to fulfill requisite criteria as framed by the Coal
India Limited for promotion.
Para-6:- We, therefore, do not find any merit in this appeal,
which is accordingly, dismissed."
35. It is also evident that the petitioner had not placed the
2025:JHHC:23612
order dated 03.01.2006 passed in WP No.4729 of 2005 before this
Court filed by the said Anil Kumar Singh because the matter which
was raised by the said Anil Kumar Singh, was similar to the writ
petitioner. However, the Co-ordinate Bench of this High Court had
dismissed the writ petition filed by the said Anil Kumar Singh by
observing that the Advance Diploma in Mining Instrumentation
and Tele-Communication is a qualification higher than the required
cannot be determined in absence of relevant details nor it can be
accepted that one year "Advanced Diploma in Mining
Instrumentation and Tele Communication" course is equivalent to
the other three years Diploma Course.
36. It further evident that the writ petitioner has also
suppressed the order dated 22.02.2006 passed in LPA No.58/2006
by the then Hon'ble Divisional Bench of this Court. Although, the
petitioner has earlier enclosed the order dated 22.08.2000 passed
by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in WP No.1679 of 1997.
37. Thus, the petitioner has deliberately suppressed the above
facts in the writ petition before this Court.
38. The Writ Court cannot decide as to which qualification is
better and which qualification is less for an Employee and this is
the policy decision and satisfaction of the Employer to prescribe
any educational qualification or any special qualification for the
purpose of granting promotion.
39. It transpires that the case of the Petitioner is identical to
the case of Shri A.K. Singh. Shri A.K. Singh was promoted from
E-1 to E-2 Grade as a special case without any precedence and
accordingly the same benefit of promotion has been allowed to the
Petitioner who was having the same qualification of Advanced
Diploma from ISM Dhanbad of one (01) year duration.
2025:JHHC:23612
40. It is evident that Shri Anil Kumar Singh moved this High
Court for his promotion from E-2 to E-3 Grade and the same had
been rejected by the Learned Single Judge of this Court Vide
Annexure-G and also by then Hon'ble Division Bench of this
Hon'ble Court vide order dated 22.06.2006 passed in LPA
No.58/2006 (i.e. Annexure-H) and held that one year Advanced
Diploma is not equivalent to three years Diploma Course.
41. Thus, this Court finds no merit in this Writ Petition
No.3370 of 2003.
Accordingly, this Writ Petition No.3370 of 2003, is
hereby, dismissed.
(Sanjay Prasad, J.)
Nishant/-
