JUDGMENT

Arijit Pasayat, J.

Leave granted.

2. Whether promotion has been rightly denied and what is the conceptual difference between the principles of merit-cum-seniority vis-a-vis seniority-cum-merit has been the subject matter of controversy in large number of cases. It is not unusual that a person entering into a particular service has an expectation that he will go higher in the hierarchy and denial thereof results invariably in litigation. The case at hand is no exception.

3. As the threshold of the litigations history, appellant was working as an Administrative Officer of the National Insurance Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as the employer) . A promotional policy was formulated on 14.2.1990 and is called "Promotion Policy for Officers". It was indicated in clause 3.1 that provisions of this policy are applicable to promotion of officers up to and including the cadre of General Manager. Appellant was not found suitable for promotion of the relevant periods i.e. 1991-92 and 1992-93. As he was not granted promotion, he filed a representation to the Chairman of the Managing Committee of the employer-company indicating that many of his juniors in the cadre of Administrativ