RAMANUJ PRASAD versus COAL INDIA LTD. AND ORS.

Citation: [2003] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 898 · Decided: 17-09-2003 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: V.N. KHARE · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
RAMANUJ PRASAD 
V. 
COAL INDIA LTD. AND ORS. 
SEPTEMBER 17, 2003 
B 
[V.N. KHARE, CJ. AND S.B. SINHA, J.] 
Service Law: 
C 
Promotion-Person discharging his duties on a higher post-Later, 
claiming 
promotion to the said post-Bharat Coking 
Coal Ltd-
Drajisman-Promoted to Executive Cadre as Public Relation Officer in 
E-2 Grade-Later assuming charge of Public Relation Manager in E-5 
Grade-Meanwhile qualifications prescribed for promotion from Non-
D Executive Cadre to Executive Cadre-Claim for promotion to E-5 grade 
or in the alternative for regularization in the E-5 grade-Allowed by 
Single Judge but rejected by Division Bench of High Court-Held, the 
employee was not promoted to the post of Public Relation Manager-He 
began to discharge his duties in the said post-Jn absence of any order 
E of promotion to the post of Public Relation Manager, passed in his favour, 
he by no stretch of imagination was entitled theretrr-He did not have any 
legal right to be promoted to the post of Public Relation Manager which 
was in E-5 grade -The writ petition was misconceived and has rightly 
been dismissed by the Division Bench of the High Court. 
F 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 2059 of 
2002. 
From the Judgment and order dated 17.7.2001 of the Calcutta High 
Court in A.P.O.T. 827 of2000 in G.A. No. 4587 of2000 in W.P. No. 2012 
G of 1997. 
S.B. Upadhyay for the Appellant. 
Mukul Rohtagi Additional Solicitor General, Ms. Kunud Lata Das 
H and Saurabh Kirpal for the respondents. 
898 
r
' 
RAMANUJ PRASAD v. COAL INDIA 
899 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
A 
Bharat Coking Coal Limited (in short the 'BCCL') is a subsidiary 
company of Coal India Limited. On 27th March, I 975, the appellant was 
appointed in BCCL as a Draftsman. It is alleged that subsequently on 20th 
Novemnber, 1987, the appellant was promoted to Executive cadre as Public B 
Relation Officer in E-2 Grade. On 9th May, 1990, the appellant took charge 
of the office of Public Relations Manager, which was of E-5 Grade. 
On 20th January, 1993, a circular was issued providing therein that 
for promotion from Non-executive cadre to the Executive cadre in public C 
relations office, the candidate must possess a Post Graduate Degree/ 
Diploma in Journalism/Public Relations and also to pass the qualifying 
examination. The appellant was not subsequently promoted allegedly on 
the ground that he did not possess the requisite qualification. 
It is this stage the appellant herein filed a writ petition under Article 
226 of the Constitution before the Calcutta high Court for issuing a 
direction to the respondents herein to promote him to E-5 Grade and in 
the alternative to regularise his services in the said Grade. 
D 
A learned Single Judge of the High Court was of the view that since E 
the appellant herein was working on the post of E-5 Grade for the last 10 
years, his services are liable to be regularised. Consequently, the writ 
petition was allowed and the order to that effect was issued to the 
respondents. The respondents thereafter preferred a Letters Patent Appeal 
before the High Court and the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court, F 
reversed the judgment of the learned Single Judge. Consequently, the 
appeal was allowed. It is against the said judgment, the appellant has come 
in appeal before us. 
Learned counsel appearing for the appellant at the threshold, argued G 
that since the appellant was promoted to E-2 Grade in the year 1987, the 
circular dated 20th January, 1993 was not applicable as the same provided 
only for promotion from Non-Executive cadre to the Executive cadre. After 
hearing the learned counsel for the parties. We are not inclined to entertain 
this argument at this stage for the reason that the appellant's case before H 
900 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2003] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
A the High Court was that he should be promoted to E-5 Grade, or in the 
alternative his services be regularised therein. 
It is not in dispute that the terms and conditions of service of the 
appellant are governed by Common Coal Cadre issued by Coal India Ltd. 
B which is the holding company. The relevant provisions of the said 
Common Coal Cadre are as under : 
c 
"Clause 4.1 : "All promotions from one executive grade to 
another will be on the basis of the recommendations of the duly 
constituted Department Promotion Committee (DCP). 
ELIGIBILITY NORMS FOR PROMOTION 
4.7(a). The promotion of departmental executives will be

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.